New “Touched” feats, what exactly does ‘appropriate level mean?

So in our RPG group there is a difference in opinion on what ‘appropriate level’ actually means in the context of the spell.

One interpretation means you can’t cast invisibility or Misty step with a first level spell slot.

The second interpretation means you can’t cast the chosen first level spell at higher spell slot levels.

Which interpretation is correct?

Can an undead rogue activate Resiliency at exactly 0 HP?

Last week, my unchained rogue got killed; rather than kill me outright, as well as for story purposes, the DM brought me back as undead: I retain my class and skills but apply the "undead" template. As an undead, I now have a Constitution score of 0, which means I would be destroyed when I hit 0 HP (I think?). I also have the rogue talent Resiliency:

Once per day, a rogue with this ability can gain a number of temporary hit points equal to twice her rogue level. Activating this ability is an immediate action that can be performed only when the rogue is brought to below 0 hit points. This ability can be used to prevent the rogue from dying. These temporary hit points last for 1 minute. If the rogue’s hit points drop below 0 due to the loss of these temporary hit points, she falls unconscious and is dying as normal.

Going by the RAW, it sounds like this means I could activate Resiliency if I am taken below 0 HP, but not if I am taken to exactly 0 HP. Is that correct? If not, how would you rule on this?

How exactly would one use the Profession (Cook) skill?

For one of the campaigns I’m going to be starting soon, most of our time will be spent out of ‘civilization,’ so our GM ruled that we would have to either acquire our own food from the wilderness (through uses of the Survival skill), or we would have to buy enough food to sustain us as we travel.

After hearing this, I ask our GM if it would be helpful for me to take ranks in Profession (Cook) to prepare food while we were out (because it might be possible that we could buy some ingredients and then make a lower DC Survival check to find enough food to supplement the ingredients we had already bought). He said that this would be a great idea, I just had to find reasonable rules for buying ingredients.

So I pored over Ultimate Equipment trying to find ingredients, and I found these “ingredients:” Bread, Caviar, Cheese, Chocolate, Fortune cookie, Honey, Ice cream, Maple syrup, Meat, Travel cake mix, and Yogurt, within the “food and drink” section; and Allspice, Basil, Beans, Cardamom, Chicken, Chilies, Cinnamon, Citrus, Cloves, Coffee beans, Cumin, Dill, Fennel, Flour, Garlic, Ginger, Mint, Mustard, Nutmeg, Nuts, Oregano, Pepper, Potatoes, Rosemary, Saffron, Salt, Sugar, Tobacco, Turnips, Vanilla, Wheat in the “trade goods” section.

This is a decent amount of ingredients yes, but there arises a different question, how much of what is needed to make a given meal? Then, how could it be edited to fit the survivalists helping supplement?

What exactly is a Flurry of Blows?

What part of attacks a monk makes during a full-attack routine constitutes a Flurry of Blows class-feature?

I was recently pointed out, Flurry of Blows says:

A monk must use a full attack action to strike with a flurry of blows.

This means, it isn’t necessary the whole full-attack, but maybe only some part of it. Should I elaborate, I always played monks with Flurry of Blows being the whole full-attack? Now, after some digging I see three possible cases, and I’m not sure which one is correct:

  1. I was right, and Flurry of Blows is a full-attack with some bonus attacks described by class-feature itself, as well as any other potential bonus attacks which all should qualify for Flurry of Blows restrictions.
    As a ‘backup’ for this version there is a table of a monk class calling attack bonuses of all attacks a monk makes using Flurry of Blows "Flurry of Blows Attack Bonus". Not "Attack Bonus When Using Flurry of Blows" or something similar. I think you got a point. Another ‘proof’ is a Fist of the Forest example statblock, which excludes bite attack from the whole routine (because it isn’t an unarmed strike or a monk weapon). Yes I know, statblocks are secondary. Still, better then nothing, I guess?
  2. Widly throuout the net it is assumed that Flurry of Blows is "An attack routine of a main hand with bonus attacks granted by class-feature itself". It isn’t restricted to a single hand, just to a number of attacks your BAB and FoB give you.
    Frankly, the ‘proof’ here is the same as above, just read differently – the table entry taken literally. To me it was obvious, they just taken the simpliest case to place into a table (attack routine with no other bonus attacks than those, given by the class-feature, table entry was describing). But at least some people claim that without a declaration of intent we can’t be sure what an intent was and we are left with what is actually printed in the table. Another ‘proofs’ are various FAQ entries, which expicitly allow natural attacks, for example, to be added after the Flurry of Blows in the same full-attack. I should point here, D&D 3.5 FAQ itself isn’t without issues, so should be emploued carefully.
  3. Flurry of Blows consists of only those bonus attacks class-feature itself gives you, and all other attacks in a full-attack a monk makes are just regular attacks.
    "Proof" here, as I understand, is a passage, quoted above in my question (while it may, probably, also support point two of it). FAQ rulings are also mentioned to support this point of view.

I’m interested, what interpreation is correct? Maybe, there is some completely different forth one, I have failed to notice?

In Ghost Ops what happens when Armour Level equals Penetration Level exactly?

I have the original version of Ghost Ops (which uses Fudge dice), not the Savage Worlds version or the OSR version. This question is about that original version, but if you think the rules in one of the other versions can throw some light on this, please chip in. I’m hoping there is clarification for this question in one of the expansions, or in an updated version of the pdf (I only have a print copy). I’ve failed to find any errata on the internet.

On page 108 of the core rulebook, it says this about Armour:

If the Armour Level is less than the Penetration Level of the bullet then no armour is rolled as the bullet has ignored it. If the Penetration Level is less than the armour level then that amount of armour is ignored.


  • If a Penetration Level 3 bullet hits Armour 2, then no armour roll and the bullet does full damage.

  • If a Penetration Level 1 bullet hits Armour 2, then the armour becomes 2 -1 = 1. And then an armour roll is made to see how much the armour reduces the damage.

What happens when a Penetration Level 2 bullet hits Armour 2?

How exactly does PostgreSQL expect me to read in/delete the CSV log files?

I’ve been following the (very sparse and cryptic) instructions here:

  1. I’ve set up the postgres_log table exactly like it says on that page.

  2. I’ve set up my postgresql.conf like this:

    log_destination = ‘csvlog’

    logging_collector = on

    log_directory = ‘C:\pglogs’

    log_filename = ‘PG_%Y-%m-%d_%H;%M;%S’

    log_rotation_age = 1d

    log_rotation_size = 0

    log_truncate_on_rotation = on

  3. I’ve restarted PostgreSQL, and it has created a PG_2020-09-20_00;56;19.csv and PG_2020-09-20_00;56;19 file.

  4. I am able to successfully run a COPY query to import the PG_2020-09-20_00;56;19.csv into my database table, if I explicitly name it.

My problems:

  1. How am I supposed to determine which filename(s) to pick to COPY into the table from my automated, regularly run script? (Since it can’t be the "current" one.)
  2. After I have somehow determined which filename(s) are safe to COPY in, and I’ve loaded them into my table, am I expected to delete these myself?
  3. What’s with the plaintext-format PG_2020-09-20_00;56;19 file? Why is that created when I clearly tell PG to use CSV?

None of this is addressed on the page I linked to and which I’ve been following.

How exactly do cylinder spells and effects “ignore obstructions” in their areas? Or what kinds of obstructions they can realistically ignore?

So, Spell descriptions on Area entry says:

When casting a cylinder-shaped spell, you select the spell’s point of origin. This point is the center of a horizontal circle, and the spell shoots down from the circle, filling a cylinder. A cylinder-shaped spell ignores any obstructions within its area.

I feel like "any" is a bit to strong claim for how it does actually work.

Could someone elaborate step-by-step, how do you actually target such a spell when there are:

  • a low wall in a spell’s area;
  • a wall, higher than the height of cylinder’s point of origin, selected by a caster;
  • ceiling above one of desireable "targets", but lower then a mentioned point of origin?

Should all of them really be ignored?

$L_2$ = {a,k | is a 3DNF (disjunctive normal form) and exist z such that safifies exactly k clauses in a} Validity of reduction $VC \leq_p L_2$

I have the following question :

$ L_2$ = {$ a,k$ | $ a$ is a 3DNF (disjunctive normal form) and exist $ z$ such that satisfies exactly $ k$ clauses in $ a$ }

I know that $ L_2 \in NPC$ .

Show that $ L_2 \in NP$ is relatively easy, I’ll skip that part.

I try to show that $ L_2 \in NPC$ using a reduction from $ VC \leq_p L_2$ (VC is vertex cover which we know in its $ NPC$ )

I defined the following function $ f$ :

$ $ f(G,k)=(a,k)$ $

I thought of something like that for each node $ i$ in $ G$ will define a literal $ x_i$ , and make it in $ 3DNF$ format, $ a=\bigvee(x_i \wedge x_i \wedge x_i)$ where $ 1 \leq i \leq n$ where $ n$ is the number of nodes in $ G$ . We can define that following $ z$ such that $ z$ safifies exactly $ k$ clauses, just give $ ‘1’$ literal $ x_i$ such that the node $ i$ is in the VC, and $ ‘0’$ otherwise, so such $ z$ exists.

So easy to see that $ (G,k) \in VC \implies (a,k) \in L_2$ since we showed explicitly such $ z$ that safifies exactly $ k$ clauses.

But I’m not sure the other side holds $ (G,k) \not\in VC \implies (a,k)\not\in L_2$ we given a graph that doesn’t have VC in size $ k$ but I think due to my building of a ($ a=\bigvee(x_i \wedge x_i \wedge x_i)$ ) we can find $ z$ that safifies exactly $ k$ clauses (actually we can find $ z$ that safifies $ x$ clauses where $ 1 \leq x \leq n$ where $ n$ is number of nodes in G.

So my reduction doesn’t hold?


What exactly constitutes “using” an ability for an attack?

I was having trouble finding a clarification on what exactly an ability needs to apply to to be "used" in an attack. Just for example, would a magic longsword that lets you add your wisdom modifier to your attack and damage on top of your strength mod "use" both wisdom and strength? Or what if the bonus is to only one of attack or damage but not both, is that still "using" the ability for that attack? The ranger’s Foe Slayer feature might be an example of the latter case, I think.

What’s exactly my router querying on these addresses?

I’m trying to understand how my router works so I’m analyzing a couple of outputs (I logged in through SSH). I get these lines when trying netstat -a -e, and I’m not sure where do these addresses come from, or what they are exactly doing.

The is the IP address that my router gets from the ISP router (WAN).

tcp  0 0 ESTABLISHED  tcp  0 0 ESTABLISHED  tcp  0 0 ESTABLISHED  tcp  0 0 ESTABLISHED  tcp  0 0 ESTABLISHED  tcp  0 0 ESTABLISHED    tcp  0 0 ESTABLISHED  tcp  0 0 ESTABLISHED