This is a scenario I hope won’t happen, but if I was to perform a manual failover on an availability group halfway through a database backup will this cause the backup to fail or would it continue? I’ve been looking through MS documentation but can’t find this specific case.
I’m running SQL 2017 in an active – active environment with the listener in a third location. (synchronous commit)
(Backups are utilizing the Ola Hallengren scripts)
until now I create a daily Logical backup backup of my Oracle 11gR2 Database at midnight while the database is running but the client application is in an idle state so that no queries are executed on the database.
Now I also want to implement a second Backup during the Day while the Database and the Client application are both up and running and queries (select/update/insert/delete) are executed.
Because I have already well tested Backup and Restore Scripts I want to continue using expdp and impdp.
This second "during the day" backup would not be directly imported in the production system after a potential data loss. I would import it on a mirrored test system and then manually use OracleSqlExplorer to query the lost data.
This leads to the following questions:
- If I use expdp to perform a backup during the database runtime is it guaranteed that the database where I take the backup from and SQL statements are executed during the backup process does contain its integrity and consistency ?
- Do I need to add certain Parameters to the expdp command to guarantee consistency ? I found this:
"expdp options for creating a consistent export dump: FLASHBACK_SCN, FLASHBACK_TIME, CONSISTENT=Y"
So far I use this linux shell script:
$ ORACLE_HOME/bin/expdp \"$ USERNAME/$ PASSWORD as sysdba\" SCHEMAS=<csv list of schemas> REUSE_DUMPFILES=Yes DIRECTORY=backup DUMPFILE=$ BACKUP_NAME.dmp
- Can I use a backup create with expdp during the database runtime as a valid source for a impdp without having to worry about integrity and consistency ? For question number 2 I found a thread that says NO
Fairly new Keeper here.
During the last session, almost all of the players used their readied small firearms (pistols) during close quarters combat. Together with firing multiple shots when it was their turn, they seemed to have a giant advantage over small weapons, like a knife or club.
So, is there a rule for using a readied firearm during a brawl? I can’t imagine that one would be able to easily gun the opponent down (as long as there are still bullets loaded), rather than being hindered to shoot (e.g., both characters struggle for weapon control).
Can players be forced to use their hand combat skill?
One of my players has a Warlock character and is using Pact of the Chain for their Pact Boon. They most often cast a pseudodragon as their familiar, but neither of us are sure about how they should be using the pseudodragon during fights. Does the familiar get its own turn in the turn order? Or can the familiar only act when the Warlock gives up their action slot? I read the PHB content, but I’m still unclear how/if the pseudodragon should be used in fights.
According to Starfinder’s starship combat rules on the Captain’s Taunt action:
You can use the communications system to broadcast a taunting message to the enemy vessel. You select an enemy vessel and a phase of combat (engineering, helm, or gunnery), and then attempt a Bluff or Intimidate check (DC = 15 + 1-1/2 × the enemy starship’s tier). If you are successful, each enemy character acting during the selected phase takes a –2 penalty to all checks for 1d4 rounds; the penalty increases to –4 if the enemy’s check is made as part of a push action. Once used against an enemy starship, regardless of the outcome, taunt can’t be used against that starship again during the same combat.
My question is when do these penalties take effect?
Example of why this is unclear: In round 1’s helm phase, on behalf of an NPC crew, the GM rolls for the piloting check, a piloting stunt, and a science officer action. Then, after these rolls have been made but during the same helm phase, the player Captaining the PC ship successfully Taunts the NPC ship and rolls a 3 for rounds of effect.
Does the -2 penalty apply retroactively to the GM’s die rolls in round 1 and then continue for rounds 2 and 3? Does the penalty last until round 3, but the NPC crew escaped the effects for round 1 because the GM rolled before the player? Or does the -2 penalty kick in at the beginning of round 2 and last until round 4, guaranteeing the NPCs suffer three rounds of effects even though they avoided the penalty in round 1?
This question does a good job explaining how surprise attacks work for the most part, but I’m not sure how such an attack would actually play out, here is what happened in my last game:
There was a group of enemy creatures, and the heroes were successfully avoiding notice nearby (I guess they were effectively hiding), watching the creatures and planning what to do while unnoticed.
After agreeing upon a plan, one of the PCs made a ranged attack against an enemy. This catched the enemy flat-footed against the attack, but the PC became observed by everyone after resolving it.
I decided to roll initiative and start the encounter at this point since it made the most sense at the time, but after reading the rules I’m not sure if this played out correctly.
Should initiative have been rolled just before the attack? This seems unfair to the heroes, since according to Avoid Notice it would force another Stealth check to see if the enemies notice them, but the heroes have not done anything yet to break their hiding. And then, if they succeed on the check, what is the point of the enemy turns?, since the heroes are still unnoticed, the enemies would do nothing until the heroes act.
This leads me to believe that the encounter should have started at the moment the heroes spotted the enemy: initiative is rolled according to Avoid Notice and if the heroes succeed on the Stealth check against the Perception DC of the enemies, they remain unnoticed. And all the watching and planning would have ocurred in Encounter Mode (a very long and pointless encounter for the most part).
If this is the correct approach, the heroes could decide to coordinate and attack all at the same time, by delaying to set their turns one after the other, and readying an attack just before the start of the turn of the first hero, so everyone would use their readied attack and then have their full turn before any enemy gets to act. Is this right?
For years, I’ve had trouble keeping the players engaged in the narrative of combat and what happens during their turns.
After the first 4 turns or so, it becomes hard to imagine what everyone does and even my players forget about their allies, and I forget about the villain’s allies as well. After a couple rounds it starts becoming a "you hit with a raise, well, throw 1d6 more", and I’m left wondering how I can make things seem more dynamic and cool, however I find it very hard to wait for players to end turns, throw dices, and then proceed to imagine and narrate what they do, it also makes players frustrated as they just want me to be down with other player’s narrative and move on to their own turn.
I’m DMing ROTF for players that have a very deep knowledge of the lore of the Forgotten Realms, it doesn’t bother me at all, but I would like at least to be prepared enough anyway to properly address the campaign theme. I’ve read "The Crystal Shard", and keep digging into wiki and other sources of lore, but there is still a lot of things that I don’t know for sure.
Massive spoiler for the Forgotten Realms books or some other campaign books.
About Bruenor, Catti-Brie & Regis:
About the Dwarf, and more specifically the Battlehammer clan?
Overall do you have any advice on how to proceed with lore accuracy in the campaign, and some sources of lore I could read in preparation
I am somewhat confused by the wording of Alicorn Lance as stated in Elminster’s Guide to Magic. The text states:
Duration: Concentration, up to 1 minute
A transparent alicorn (unicorn horn) forms about 2 inches from your brow. Starting the turn you cast this spell, for the duration you can use a bonus action during each of your turns to launch the horn at a creature you can see within range.
I am confused about the supposed contradiction between "during each of your turns" and "launch the horn".
Does it return between launches? Does it reappear? Does it ever leave your head in the first place?
Can you launch a new horn each round?
Or is it just a single-shot effect that you can use on one bonus action that occurs during the spells duration?
In a campaign amongst my friends and myself, I am playing a divination wizard who enjoys utilizing suggestion in social activities from time-to-time. In this particular scenario, my party and I were in a were in a church speaking to a Cardinal in his office. A monk friend of mine decided to say some heretical words which prompted the Cardinal to yell "Guards!" thus beginning a train of 15 guards rushing into the room. In this time, I wanted to cast suggestion as a means of evading subsequent conflict. Whether or not my suggestion would have been seen as reasonable is not a part of this question, but instead I am interested in the manner in which the guards would have viewed this spell cast.
Suggestion, of course, is composed of a verbal component and a material component which is then followed by up to a two sentence suggestion.
The immediate feedback from the DM upon attempting to use suggestion is that the cast would be obvious to the guards as spellcasting in itself is not a secret to bystanders thus no opportunity to roll out any plays. DM ruling accepted with some pushback, but we tabled this until after the session where we basically agreed that in situations such as a busy bar or a busy marketplace I could potentially get away with pulling off a suggestion without drawing too much attention to myself. Seems reasonable to me.
Now my issue lies in how this was handled. If these guards are rushing in, certainly making some noise, they don’t necessarily know I’m a wizard before hand, and I’m not facing these guards; should my verbal and material components use be painfully obvious to the guards or is this something that can be done with some subtlety given the situation?