Recently played with a group, where 3 of their clerics would cast spirit guardians, claiming monsters in the area had to make 3 wisdom saves for 3d8 damage each, potentially adding up to 9d8 damage per round.
Is this any different then trying to have two casters cast insect plague or cloudkill on the same area, or bless on the same individual?
Ran into a problem, anyone can help?
I’m looking for a TCG-OPAL protocol stack agent, to be working on the SSD side. I found partial implementations of host-side TCG-OPAL. These are opening sessions and initiating the commands. I need the side that serves these commands, residing on the SSD. Host side TCG-OPAL implementations:
- Drive Trust Alliance: https://github.com/Drive-Trust-Alliance/sedutil
- Linux source code: https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/block/sed-opal.c
I have a Rock Gnome Artificer, which grants Tool Expertise, but I want to take the Wonder Maker feat. Do you add +3 for proficiency, +3 because of Tool Expertise, and +3 because of Wonder Maker when doing a tinker’s tools check?
Starting at 3rd level, your proficiency bonus is doubled for any ability check you make that uses your proficiency with a tool.
Starting at 6th level, your proficiency bonus is doubled for any ability check you make that uses your proficiency with a tool.
When you make a check using your proficiency with tinker’s tools, you add double your proficiency bonus to the check.
If I cast Fire Shield for fire and ice, will they stack?
Do the benefits of oil of sharpness stack with those of +1/2/3 magic ammunition?
I’m really just curious whether these also stack as +X ammo does with a +3 bow, or if there’s a point at which things stop stacking.
The War Domain cleric has the Channel Divinity option Guided Strike (PHB, p. 63):
Starting at 2nd level, you can use your Channel Divinity to strike with supernatural accuracy. When you make an attack roll, you can use your Channel Divinity to gain a +10 bonus to the roll. You make this choice after you see the roll, but before the DM says whether the attack hits or misses.
The Channel Divinity option War God’s Blessing allows an identical benefit to extend to another creatures:
At 6th level, when a creature within 30 feet of you makes an attack roll, you can use your reaction to grant that creature a +10 bonus to the roll, using your Channel Divinity. You make this choice after you see the roll, but before the DM says whether the attack hits or misses.
If two War Domain clerics were in the same party, and one uses Guided Strike to add +10 to their attack roll, could the other War Domain cleric use War God’s Blessing to add a further +10 to that attack roll?
Or would they not stack, as they are the same source (i.e. a War Domain cleric’s Channel Divinity)?
In the world of mutable/ephemeral data structures and imperative programming languages, one of the classic ways to implement a stack or queue is to use array doubling: use mutation to fill up or empty an array, doubling or halving to expand/contract. Such stacks/queues have several nice properties:
- They use at most twice as much memory as strictly necessary.
- They involve minimal indirection.
- They use cache efficiently.
- They have amortized $ O(1)$ insertion and deletion operations.
In a purely functional system, this approach falls down quite flat, because "mutate the array to fill/empty" becomes very expensive: the array has to be copied each time. I was wondering if there might be some reasonable compromise approach, making something more compact than classical approaches (a la Okasaki) but still with constant amortized time operations. Stacks are simpler, so I started thinking about those. My first attempt (in Haskell notation) was
data Queue a = Shallow !(Array a) | Deep !(Array a) (Queue a)
with the rule that the array at depth $ n$ must have either $ 0$ or $ 2^n$ elements. Unfortunately, this doesn’t look like it’s nearly good enough. It appears that insertions impose an $ O(\log n)$ amortized cost, since flipping from a 1 digit to a 0 digit gets more expensive the deeper it happens in the tree. My next attempt was the same, but using skew binary numbers instead of binary numbers. Same deal. Is there some trick I’m missing, or am I asking to have my cake and eat it too?
Giant’s Stance states the following:
While you are in this stance, you deal damage as if you were one size larger than normal, to a maximum of Large. This benefit improves your weapon and unarmed strike damage. It does not confer any of the other benefits or drawbacks of a change in size, such as a modifier to ability scores or AC, or an improved reach.
while Improved Natural Attack states the following:
The damage for one of the creature’s natural attack forms increases by one step, as if the creature’s size had increased by one category: 1d2, 1d3, 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 2d6, 3d6, 4d6, 6d6, 8d6, 12d6. A weapon or attack that deals 1d10 points of damage increases as follows: 1d10, 2d8, 3d8, 4d8, 6d8, 8d8, 12d8.
Giant’s Stance does have an upper limit (Large), therefore, as a Medium creature, with Improved Natural Attack making the character already Large, Giant’s Stance would have no effect. However, my thinking is that Giant’s Stance would make the character Large and after that, Improved Natural Attack would be counted as one step higher; that is, Huge.
Is this correct or do both affect the base size (that is, both convert from Medium to Large) and are therefore redundant?
Currently I am using WAMPserver on Windows, I'm very happy with it, but Drupal requires Drush and Composer for website maintenance and updates, all the literature is written for linux.
So I am looking into using WSL2 with ubuntu – and I am looking for a tool similar to WAMPserver for ubuntu
What I particularly appreciate in WAMPserver is that everything comes pre-installed and pre-configured, and the program takes care of creating new vhosts, etc. as needed, no need to do anything in the…
GUI for LAMP stack with ubuntu on WSL2 for website development