Do reactions that trigger on saving throws give knowledge of saving throws that would otherwise be secret?


Preliminaries.

Some reactions have triggers which are tangible events in the fiction of the game. For example, feather fall‘s casting time is:

1 reaction, which you take when you or a creature within 60 feet of you falls.

This is something tangible within the fiction: feather fall’s trigger is something perceived and understood by both the player out of game and the character in game.

On the other hand, some reactions have triggers which are intangible within the fiction of the game: they are perceived only by the player out of game, and do not actually reflect anything about the character’s knowledge in game. For example, the Artificer’s Flash of Genius ability says:

When you or another creature you can see within 30 feet of you makes an ability check or a saving throw, you can use your reaction to add your Intelligence modifier to the roll.

Another example is the Oath of the Watchers Paladin’s Vigilant Rebuke ability:

You’ve learned how to chastise anyone who dares wield beguilements against you and your wards. Whenever you or a creature you can see within 30 feet of you succeeds on an Intelligence, a Wisdom, or a Charisma saving throw, you can use your reaction to deal 2d8 + your Charisma modifier force damage to the creature that forced the saving throw.

Both of these abilities allow the character to take a reaction in response to another character making a saving throw.

But passing, failing, or even attempting a saving throw are not something characters know about. Characters don’t even know what saving throws are. These two questions discuss this:

  • In 5e, are saving throw results detected by the opposing party?
  • Do characters know if someone else, who they can see, has failed a saving throw?

The Scenario.

Suppose the evil Archmage casts scrying on one of our party members, in an attempt to secretly spy on them. Scrying calls for a wisdom saving throw. The party would normally have no idea this was going, no idea someone was making a saving throw, and no idea if that saving throw succeeded or failed.

But what if we have an Artificer or Watchers Paladin around?

Rules as written the artificer or paladin would be able to use their respective reactions in response to the saving throw for the Archmage’s scrying.

Do the artificer and paladin characters know in game that they used their abilities in response to the saving throw against the scrying spell?

Obviously, they don’t know what a saving throw is, and won’t know that it is a scrying spell at work. But do they know that something is afoot and that they used their ability?

Do sleeping or otherwise helpless targets get Reflex saves?

According to the 3.5 PHB (p. 309), a helpless (e.g., sleeping) target is treated as having Dex 0, and has a "-5 modifier". On p. 153, it further explains that a helpless defender can’t use any Dexterity bonus "to AC. In fact, his Dexterity score is treated as if it were 0 and his Dexterity modifier to AC as if it were -5." (Emphasis added.) It also states that a coup de grace automatically hits and does critical damage.

What I can’t seem to find is any discussion of whether a sleeping or otherwise helpless target gets a Reflex saving throw. I’m particularly interested in whether a helpless target gets a Reflex save vs. dragon breath weapons.

It seems to me that a helpless, particularly sleeping, target won’t even know it’s under attack, and thus won’t be able to "escape by moving quickly" when dragon breath, a spell attack or the like comes at it.

How do the rules deal with this situation? If they don’t address it, how can it best be resolved?

What advantages or disadvantages would best replicate a video game style inventory in an otherwise Modern setting?

What advantages or disadvantages would best replicate a video game style inventory in an otherwise Modern setting? I’m looking for guidance, as it seems to veer into the really expensive with cosmic advantages. Am I missing some lower key lower power possibilities?

The background is a modern setting with minor super powers which have a power level that do not exceed the level of influence on the world based on commonly available tech to a middle class family’s income base. Thus, things like guns & rifles (ranged attack powers), fireworks (explosive powers), hydraulic jacks (strength powers), man-portable tank of liquid nitrogen (freezing powers), and so forth are some examples of the limits on powers.

One of the proposed powers is an Inventory ability. Just that, nothing else. Store it, leave it, remove it. Thus, the analog tech would be a backpack or similar. Except that it is not visible or touchable by others.

Detecting a cycle in an undirected graph and printing the vertices if there is a cycle, printing no cycle otherwise

Problem: Find an O(E + V) time algorithm that outputs the vertices of a cycle of G, if it exists. If G has no cycles, the algorithm outputs no cycle. So if there is a cycle 1, … 3, 1, it would print 1, …, 3, 1.

So I was thinking of doing a BFS, and if the currently examined vertex’s neighbor v has been visited prior, then there is a cycle. However, I am not sure how I might go about tracking the vertices in order to print. I believe I would have to view the BFS-Tree, but unsure.

What can be computed by a Turing Machine that cannot be otherwise computed?

This post seems to indicate that “C” is not Turing Complete because implementations of “C” always have some fixed number of bits limit of addressability: Is C actually Turing-complete?

In the current post I am asking what difference does that make? No actual (totally unlimited space) Turing Machines can ever exist. If we could somehow form a memory cell out of a single molecule we would run out of molecules in the universe before we actually achieved totally unlimited memory.

I am exploring the practical difference of Turing Equivalence.

Would the flavoring from the Prestidigitation cantrip mask a food/drink that is otherwise inedible?

Based off of this other question about flavoring swamp water, and highly related to this question about the “limits” of the flavoring.

It’s been kind of skirted around, but can magical “flavor” mask something that the body would normally reject if tried to consume?

A clear cut example would be poisons. Many poisons are detected by the human body as they are bitter so they are spat out. Could a poison be flavored to the point where the body would accept it? This isn’t neutralizing the poison in any way, it’s still poison.

Can the flavoring of something override the natural gag reflexes?

Does the Tavern Brawler feat grant proficiency when the character is not proficient otherwise?

This is a bit challenging to phrase, so I’ll use an example.

A human wizard with the Tavern Brawler feat gets fed up with a unruly Gnome and snaps off a heavy gate post to stab him with. The DM rules that the post is similar enough to a pike to use its damage dice. Is the Wizard proficient in this improvised Pike?

A related question queries whether or not an improvised weapon deemed similar enough to an actual weapon is still improvised – the consensus was that it was.

If that’s the case, the Tavern Brawler feat states:

You are proficient with improvised weapons.

If this too is the case, does this create a loophole of sorts where a character can wield an improvised variant of a weapon they otherwise couldn’t use proficiently?

Does the Tavern Brawler feat grant proficiency when the character is not proficient otherwise?

This is a bit challenging to phrase, so I’ll use an example.

A human wizard with the Tavern Brawler feat gets fed up with a unruly Gnome and snaps off a heavy gate post to stab him with. The DM rules that the post is similar enough to a pike to use its damage dice. Is the Wizard proficient in this improvised Pike?

A related question queries whether or not an improvised weapon deemed similar enough to an actual weapon is still improvised – the consensus was that it was.

If that’s the case, the Tavern Brawler feat states:

You are proficient with improvised weapons.

If this too is the case, does this create a loophole of sorts where a character can wield an improvised variant of a weapon they otherwise couldn’t use proficiently?

Make search engines show related (by name and otherwise) businesses in search results

So, I manage the website of a restaurant, “ABC”. This restaurant has recently opened another outlet in a different area. They called it, “ABC Express”.

Both restaurants are having their own Google My Business pages. And they both show up in the top 10-15 results in a search for their names.

So far so good.

I’d like to understand if there’s any thing I can do, in terms of SEO, to make the results show “ABC Express” also, when the user searches for “ABC” and vice versa.

What’s happening, now, is through word of mouth, people are hearing that ABC opened another outlet in this other area. They don’t know that the other outlet is called, “ABC Express”. So, they google for – “ABC” and the new outlet doesn’t even show up in the top 100 results, because it’s called “ABC Express”.

What I’ve done to make Google understand the two restaurants are related:

  1. Split up their single page website, into two location pages. One has information about the original – “ABC”, the second page has information about the “ABC Express”. The landing page just has information about the dishes (common) they serve. Each of these pages show up independent within the top 10-15 results, which you search for either “ABC” or “ABC Express”.

  2. The landing page’s json-ld declares, “ABC” as an Organization and includes information that’s common to both. Each of the location pages, includes json-ld that declares the @type as Restaurant and then references the parent through parentOrganization.

It’s been about three weeks since these changes were published and google has indexed all pages (verified in Google Search Console). However, I’m still not seeing the desired results.

Is there anything else I could do?