Are d8, 10, 12, etc. dice, fair dice?

Given a perfectly formed d8, or d10 or any d dice in Dungeons & Dragons (D&D), are they all fair dice? Is it equally possible to roll any number on any given dice?

I am writing a text based, online D&D engine that would allow a DM to create their own world and invite their friends to play that world online. I am writing a cryptographically secure random number generator to roll the dice, but knowing nothing about D&D, I don’t know if all the dice are fair.

If I ready a action (spell) in response to a companion’s attack, what is a fair GM rulling over the order of events?

In our campaign, I have a cleric who wished to use Ready an Action as his move. His idea behind this was that he wanted to ready Guiding Bolt and the condition he set was that, when one of the player (fighter) attacked a creature (one of 2 trolls), he would release the bolt beforehand. Therefore the figther would have advantage on her attack if the Guiding Bolt hit first.

I ruled that the fighter hit first, but I’m not so sure now – and feel like I was unfair in my ruling, maybe.

I can see both points of view:

  1. If I was the cleric readying my spell, I would cast the spell as soon as I noticed my fighter’s companion intention to attack a creature.

  2. But, also if I’m the fighter and I’m 5′ away from a creature, maybe my attack would land first, before the Guiding Bolt.

I would like some RAW guidance on this please. But, if not explicitly available, then a response with lived experience of a GM on a similar ruling to do with resolving oder of events.

Is this limitation on “Change Appearance” fair?

For context :

In a new campaign, the DM accepted I’d play a changeling, but wants to limit its "Change Appearance" ability. His idea was to allow only one change a day, during a long rest.
The reason he gave is that he didn’t want this ability to be "abused", as he played a changeling in the past and did abuse it by changing his character’s appearance "as often as he could". Also, since my character has the Charlatan background, he has planned to have her run into former marks randomly, and I think he doesn’t want it to be too easy to escape.

We are going to talk about it in a few day and I’d like to propose another way to restrict "Change Appearance".


"New" Change Appearance

You can change your appearance and your voice. You determine the specifics of the changes, including your coloration, hair length, and sex. You can also adjust your height and weight, but not so much that your size changes. You can make yourself appear as a member of another race, though none of your game statistics change.

Changing your appearance in this way takes 15 minutes. Your skin and organs take a half-melted consistency and start bubbling and reshaping themselves. Your bones change their shape and size. During that time, you are paralysed, blind, and deaf.

Because of involuntary spasms and various flesh noises, the target number for any perception check that could reveal your position is the same as if you were casting a spell with somatic and verbal components.


Questions :

Would these changes prevent the abuse of the "Change Appearance" ability ?

Is the description clear enough ? Not too long ?

Does it feel like it could be integrated smoothly into a campaign?

It’s not too restrictive ?

Related : previous question on the same subject.

Bounty Boards: How to make them fair and make sense

So I wanted to create a new adventure hook I could use over many campaigns and figured, “Hmm, most medieval settings would have bounty boards set up in towns, offer prices for people willing to go out and deal with local problems”. Sooo I got out my Monster Manuel and Dungeon Masters Guide, and 2 hours searching online, and here’s my actual problem.

When sorted via challenge rating (DMG pg 136) monsters have their value set via the 5 different currencies which you roll to the d100 to determine which currency you reward players with. However, lets use Goblins (MM pg 165) and Kenku (MM pg 194)as the example. Both are CR 1/4, which places them on the Individual Treasure: Challenge 0-4. However, common sense would tell me the following:

Assume a town has a problem with Kenku and Goblins.

Kenku are known for their greed and will do anything to possess pretty things. While many beg, others steal or commit other crimes to earn such possessions. When you defeat a Kenku, it is logical to find gems, coins and possibly art objects in some form in its home whatever place it may be.

Goblins on the other hand are also motivated by greed, however their tendencies towards forming large groups or smaller packs prevents any 1 goblin from achieving a large amount for himself. However they have a tendency of training animals such as rats and wolves (or sometimes a Worg).

While a Kenku or even a group of kenku can cause quite the problem in a town, if there is a goblin problem, the town will often rather have the goblins taken care of over the Kenku. As such, on a Bounty Board a pair of goblin ears as proof would be worth more than a Kenku Beak as proof, despite them both being the same CR and belong to the same treasure Table.

So how can I make the Bounty Board both fair to the CR and make sense with the D&D Lore?

fair chore allocation with qualification


Background

There are $ n$ indivisible heterogenous bads (chores).
There are $ m$ agents.
The subjective utility functions of the agents are additive and identical. e.g $ \forall X,i,j\ V_i(X) = V_j(X)$ .
The agents have different entitlements over the chores.
Finally, there is an additional constraint: there are chores that some agents cannot be assigned to perform (i.e the qualification constraint)

The task

I would like to be able to:

  1. define some fairness criterion that matches the problem
  2. find an algorithm that provides an allocation that implements it.

I believe that due to the qualification constraint some standard fairness criteria, like $ EF1$ , may not exist. This is why I am also asking for a fairness criterion.

Unconditionally fair, weakly fair, and strongly fair scheduling

I am trying to understand the difference between weakly fair and strongly fair scheduling.

For example, what scheduling policy would ensure that a process delayed at its first await statement will eventually be able to proceed?

weakly fair: A condition becomes true and remains true at least until after the conditional atomic action has been executed.

strongly fair: If the condition is infinitely often true, a process will eventually see it as true and be able to proceed.

I feel that it needs strongly fair scheduling because the process is being delayed at its await statement but I am not sure.

If someone could provide a good explanation, something besides temporal logic?

How does the Tinker fair against traps?

Similar to this question, I am curious about what the tinker tools can do, and how it interacts specifically with Theives’ tools.

In XGE, P. 84, there is this image, of which I think of a Tinker’s tool: Wind up Dragon

However, in the description on the same page it says (emphasis not my own):

A set of tinker’s tools is designed to enable you to repair many mundane objects. Though you can’t manufacture much with tinker’s tools, you can mend torn clothes, sharpen a worn sword, and patch a tattered suit of chain mail.

Components. Tinker’s tools include a variety of hand tools, thread, needles, a whetstone, scraps of cloth and leather, and a small pot of glue.

History. You can determine the age and origin of objects, even if you have only a few pieces remaining from the original.

Investigation. When you inspect a damaged object, you gain knowledge of how it was damaged and how long ago.

Repair. You can restore 10 hit points to a damaged object for each hour of work. For any object, you need access to the raw materials required to repair it. For metal objects, you need access to an open flame hot enough to make the metal pliable.

Tinker’s Tools Activity DC

Temporarily repair a disabled device 10

Repair an item in half the time 15

Improvise a temporary item using scraps 20

So with that, I am confused on two aspects:

  1. Is the tinkerer someone who can make wind-up dragons? or someone who is a jack-of-all-trades on a small scale? (a smith and weaver who can only do minor repairs) Or both?

    1.2. If not, who would make the dragon in the picture?

and

  1. How does this interact with the ability to disarm traps? Given the tinkerer SHOULD be able to figure out how to repair things (and they can Investigate how something was broken) then shouldn’t they be able to figure out how to disarm the trap? If so, do they also have mastery over Theive’s Tools which ARE for disarming the traps?

I realize this might seem like a whole bunch of questions at once, but I think it all fit in as they are all based on my not understanding why the definition of tinker’s tools doesn’t allow you to make the dragon.

How can I let my PCs create new spells in a balanced and fair way?

Assuming the DM is on board with the premise, are there resources that would provide some guidelines on how a PC may create a spell, and mechanics that should be considered for balancing and fairness purposes?

How can I let my players develop new spells without breaking the game?

Ideally these resources wouldn’t necessarily be limited to the 5e mechanics, if previously published materials can be translated appropriately or be used as a base model.