My group is obsessed with everyone attending the Session, which destroy’s any regular playing [closed]

I don’t know if this is a weird thing to ask.

However, my group consists of 5 Players and our DM. They’re great people and every Session is a lot of fun, ngl. The issue I’m having is that -for whatever reason- everyone (except me apparently) refuses to even think about playing if one of the Players isn’t attending.
Scheduling is difficult even when accepting losses. But only playing when everyone can attend, makes it impossible and I really don’t want a Campaign that runs once a month, if we’re lucky. Maybe I am just in my bubble since I have rather flexible working times.
But I just cannot understand, why one, or even two players being absent, would be a huge problem. I’ve been DMming myself for a while, rebalancing is annoying, but not impossible, even on the fly. A PC could be played by the DM or the PC does something in their Downtime while the group does something else, which explains why they aren’t there. For a big and important story arch, I would understand that everyone should ideally be there but even then one player not being there wouldn’t kill anyone. Especially since the Campaign is made in mind that players and PC’s are interchangeable and until now we haven’t gotten to a point where it was fundamentally important that everyone was there… If three players (more than 50%) can’t make it, then yeah, I understand cancelling a Session. But certainly not at 1-2 Players out of 5.

I just kinda want to hear your opinion. Either I am dumb for thinking that way, or I am not the only one here thinking that way

WordPress Plugin to display a list of input fields which are visible to everyone?

I am looking for a plugin/workaround recommendations. I am sorry if the title was not descriptive enough, this is the best I could think of. Any edit suggestion is welcome.

I want to display a list of editable text fields, which are updated by any visitor, and all updates are live and public to everyone else. The submitted fields may or may not be editable anymore.

So, once a visitor visits the page, there will be a list of empty blanks/fields, short text fields for instance. They will fill in their name and their details, then submit. All other visitors will see that this field is taken/filled.

The reason is that there will be a list of offerings, and the link will be distributed among participants only, each participant can fill a “slot” with their details after seeing which slots are available.

I don’t need any extra validation or complexity. Logging in is not required.

  • Preferably free, reasonably paid solutions are accepted, too.

Does Mirage Arcane spell allow everyone to see everything and let the (real) sunshine in?

The spell Mirage Arcane allows for a cubic mile of terrain modification. Can this be used so one can see everything?

Excerpts of Interest

The Illusion includes audible, visual, tactile, and olfactory elements, so it can turn clear ground into Difficult Terrain (or vice versa) or otherwise impede Movement through the area.

Also of note:

The spell doesn’t disguise, conceal, or add creatures.

So i am asking if these two passages suggest one can make a cubic mile totally transparent / translucent with this spell.

Sample scenario:

A group of vampires sleep a half mile (safely) below the surface around noon on a clear, cloudless day. Some bloke casts Mirage Arcane on the ground area and transforms the entire region as transparent as fibre optics. Ten minutes later Mr. von Zarovich & his vampiric friends are all turned completely to ash.

Whilst not slaughtering innocent undead blood suckers, this might be a great spell for looking into any fortress, dungeon or whatever you like. Even better than Scotty’s transparent aluminum, perhaps?

Long Story Short: Wizard tries to cast Mirage Arcane spell so as to render a cubic mile of solid rock utterly transparent & see through for about ten days or so.

Does Time Stop apply a magical effect on only the caster, or does it affect everyone else too?

If the answers to this question are anything to go by, time stop seems to be a surprisingly nuanced spell, but one basic disagreement that’s appeared in the comments has been that one camp thinks time stop applies an effect only on the caster, whereas the other thinks it also applies a magical effect to everyone else, too.

Granted, time stop applies a magical effect on the caster – of that, I have no question. But does it also apply a magical effect on everyone else in the multiverse as well?

Why does time stop NOT apply a magical effect on other creatures

Here are the points I’ve understood for the side that thinks time stop applies only to the caster:

  1. It has a range of Self, meaning that it only applies a magical effect on the caster.

  2. There is no spell in D&D that applies an effect to every single creature in the multiverse, except maybe for wish.

Why DOES time stop apply a magical effect on other creatures

Here are the points from the side that thinks time stop applies a magical effect to everyone as well (I’m a member of this camp):

  1. Spells with a range of Self can still apply magical effects to other creatures, such as detect thoughts, dream, magic jar, and spirit guardians.

  2. The spell’s first sentence says: “You briefly stop the flow of time for everyone but yourself,” and that wording seems to directly state that everyone but the caster experiences a magical effect where the flow of time stops for them.

Consequences, implications

There are consequences for choosing one side over the other, which is the motivation for asking this question.

Consequences: Time stop does NOT apply a magical effect to other creatures

Going with the first camp, you can side step the confusion that comes with zones of antimagic and time stop. But, it doesn’t strictly follow the wording of the spell by ignoring the sentence “You briefly stop the flow of time for everyone but yourself.”

In addition, by claiming that spells with a range of Self do not impose a magical effect on other creatures, that same logic can be applied to, say, magic jar, where a humanoid inside a zone of antimagic can still be possessed because the spell has a range of Self, so it affects only the caster, and therefore the possession of other creatures is not a magical effect of the spell. The same logic can be applied to many other spells with a range of Self, some of which are listed above.

Consequences: Time stop DOES apply a magical effect to other creatures

Going with the second camp, yes, you can more closely follow the spell’s text as written. However, you also open the doors to the aforementioned confusion between zones of antimagic and time stop.

If time stop creates a magical effect on every other creature in the multiverse, across planes of existence (which seems to be the valid interpretation of “everyone but yourself” – and take note, this is a 9th level spell on par with wish), then being immune to it in any way (whether you’re inside a zone of antimagic, you are immune via the wish spell, or you’re one of the gods of the multiverse) will allow you to observe as everyone suddenly freezes in time whenever someone casts time stop.

It also fails to offer a resolution to the linked question, where initiative order between someone inside an antimagic field and a caster of time stop is not well defined.

The Question

With all the above in context, the question is as the title says: does Time Stop apply a magical effect on only the caster, or does it affect everyone else too?

Does Lightning Bolt affect everyone in its line of effect?

I’m looking for clarification on a spell effect. The specific spell in question is lightning bolt, 3rd-level Sorcerer/Wizard spell. It has an area of a 120-ft line. Does it pass through enemies? If I have 4 enemies in a line in range, does it hit all, or only the first? I saw Do enemies block line of effect?, but that only helped for 4e, this is PF which has different wording.

So does an enemy count as a “Solid Barrier” for the purpose of blocking the effect from going further? Any info is appreciated, especially if you can point me to a source I can reference in the future.

How to handle a player having two characters when everyone else has one?

I started a new campaign for my D&D 5e group and we had made some excellent progress and the characters had made it to 4th level. While entering the “Stone Tooth” through the front door one of the players had their character advance across the rope bridge over the deep chasm. The character was hit by a thrown spear and then the player rolled a natural 1 on their saving throw to keep their grip on the bridge. The character was then irretrievably dead since it fell 200 ft into the underground river.

The party decided that going through the front door had been a bad idea and retreated back to the nearby town so the player could roll up a new character. The player rolled up a rather different character and we played on and the party made it further into the adventure using another entrance.

Later the player of the dead character realized that they weren’t having as much fun with their new character and asked if there was anyway they could get their old character back. I came up with an in game way for this to happen that added some interesting role playing difficulties and set the new character against the returning old character.

However, I am not sure how to have these two characters being played by a single player be adversaries. I have thought of taking over the new PC and have the player only play the old character but I’m sure if this is such a good idea. I also don’t want this player playing more than one character, I prefer that the players focus on a single character.

I have 5 players and they are powerful enough that they can handle the level appropriate encounters, adding a 6th character is going to over power the party and I worry that some players might be jealous of this player having two characters. I want everyone to have fun!

What should I do?

Are the somatic and verbal components of a spell the same for everyone?

My question: is there any official statement that says that a spell has the same words/gestures independent of who’s casting it?

So, for example, if a halfling wizard casts fireball: would the words he has to say as verbal components and the gestures he does as somatic components be the same as an elf sorcerer casting the same spell?

Would a ranger know that another ranger that he can see cast Hunter’s Mark on him just by seeing the somatic components and/or hearing the verbal components?