How do critical hits work with static monster damage?

If I use static damage from monsters, how do I calculate the value on critical hits? I can’t just double the value, because that includes the static modifier. Should I recalculate the damage on the fly (so, if the monster usually has (7) d8 + 3, I make it (11) 2d8 + 3)? That’s kind of pain in the ass. Or do the monsters not double their static damage on critical hits and only get the benefit of the guaranteed hit? Alternatively, I could decide that I roll on crits.

Are there official rules the govern this?

Convert Cloak of Displacement to a static bonus instead of disadvantage

One of my players has a Cloack of Displacement, which grants, for every round, monsters have disadvantage attacks against the player until the first attack hits.

What follows from that power, is that I have to ask the player for every attack, if the monster has disadvantage or not. That is an extra effort I don’t want to do; the information about whether or not he has a benefit is on his side of the table. (Note: as a DM I always ask “does AC X hit you?”)

So, we want to change the Cloak; instead of granting the monster disadvantage on their attack, the Cloak offers him, for every round, a bonus to AC, until he is hit.

Here is my question; what bonus should the Cloak give to the player?

Assume the player is a level 12 PC with an AC of 16. If we need to take the attack bonus of the monsters into account; assume a master needs to roll a 10 to hit.

Is the choice of static and dynamic typing not visible to the programmers of the languages?

From Design Concepts in Programming Languages by Turbak

Although some dynamically typed languages have simple type markers (e.g., Perl variable names begin with a character that indicates the type of value: $ for scalar values, @ for array values, and % for hash values (key/value pairs)), dynamically typed languages typically have no explicit type annotations.

The converse is true in statically typed languages, where explicit type annotations are the norm. Most languages descended from Algol 68 , such as Ada , C / C++ , Java , and Pascal , require that types be explicitly declared for all variables, all data-structure components, and all function/procedure/method parameters and return values. However, some languages (e.g., ML , Haskell , FX , Miranda ) achieve static typing without explicit type declarations via a technique called type reconstruction or type inference.

Question 1: For dynamically typed languages which “have no explicit type annotations”, do they need to infer/reconstruct the types/classes, by using some type/class reconstruction or type/class inference techniques, as statically typed languages do?

Question 2: The above quote says static or dynamic typing and explicit or no type annotations can mix and match.

  • Is the choice between static and dynamic typing only internal to the implementations of programming languages, not visible to the programmers of the languages?

  • Do programmers in programming languages only notice whether the languages use explicit type/class annotations or not, not whether the languages use static or dynamic typing? Specifically, do languages with explicit type/class annotations look the same to programmers, regardless of whether they are static or dynamic typing? Do languages without explicit type/class annotations look the same to programmers, regardless of whether they are static or dynamic typing?

Question 3: If you can understand the following quote from Practical Foundation of Programming Languages by Harper (a preview version is https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~rwh/pfpl/2nded.pdf),

  • Do the syntax for numeral (abstract syntax num[n] or concrete syntax overline{n}) and abstraction (abstract syntax fun(x.d) or concrete syntax λ(x)d ) use explicit types/classes with dynamic typing?
  • If yes, is the purpose of using explicit types/classes to avoid type inference/reconstruction?

Section 22.1 Dynamically Typed PCF

To illustrate dynamic typing, we formulate a dynamically typed version of PCF, called DPCF. The abstract syntax of DPCF is given by the following grammar:

Exp d :: = x x variable            num[n] overline{n}      numeral            zero zero      zero            succ(d) succ(d)      successor            ifz {d0; x.d1} (d) ifz d {zero → d0 | succ(x) → d1}      zero test            fun(x.d) λ(x)d      abstraction            ap(d1; d2) d1 (d2)      application            fix(x.d) fix x is d      recursion 

There are two classes of values in DPCF, the numbers, which have the form num[n], and the functions, which have the form fun(x.d). The expressions zero and succ(d) are not themselves values, but rather are constructors that evaluate to values. General recursion is definable using a fixed point combinator but is taken as primitive here to simplify the analysis of the dynamics in Section 22.3.

As usual, the abstract syntax of DPCF is what matters, but we use the concrete syntax to improve readability. However, notational conveniences can obscure important details, such as the tagging of values with their class and the checking of these tags at run-time. For example, the concrete syntax for a number, overline{n}, suggests a “bare” representation, the abstract syntax reveals that the number is labeled with the class num to distinguish it from a function. Correspondingly, the concrete syntax for a function is λ (x) d, but its abstract syntax, fun(x.d), shows that it also sports a class label. The class labels are required to ensure safety by run-time checking, and must not be overlooked when comparing static with dynamic languages.

Thanks.

Divine Fury static damage round up or down?

I have a new level 3 Zealot Barbarian and I am wondering about the wording of the feature Divine Fury.

Divine Fury (XGtE, page 11)

Starting when you choose this path at 3rd level, you can channel divine fury into your weapon strikes. While you’re raging, the first creature you hit on each of your turns with a weapon attack takes extra damage equal to 1d6 + half your barbarian level. The extra damage is necrotic or radiant; you choose the type of damage when you gain this feature.

Would the static “half your barbarian level” round down as most things do that are not specified when at an odd level?

I suspect it does but I would like some clarification per RAW.

Divine Fury static damage round up or down?

I have a new level 3 Zealot Barbarian and I am wondering about the wording of the feature Divine Fury.

Divine Fury (XGtE, page 11)

Starting when you choose this path at 3rd level, you can channel divine fury into your weapon strikes. While you’re raging, the first creature you hit on each of your turns with a weapon attack takes extra damage equal to 1d6 + half your barbarian level. The extra damage is necrotic or radiant; you choose the type of damage when you gain this feature.

Would the static “half your barbarian level” round down as most things do that are not specified when at an odd level?

I suspect it does but I would like some clarification per RAW.

How can I configure static IP on ubuntu server 18.04

Have 2 Ubuntu Servers. Tried to configure static IP on both of them. Server 1 everything is working file. Server 2 giving error:

/etc/netplan/50-cloud-init.yaml:10:18: Invalid YAML: inconsistent
indentation:
dhcp4: false
^

file /etc/netplan/50-cloud-init.yaml:

network:
ethernets:
eno1:
addresses:[10.0.0.2/24]
dhcp4: false
gateway4: 10.0.0.1
nameservers:
addresses: [8.8.8.8,1.1.1.1]
version: 2

I will do On Page SEO Optimization for WP Website & Static Website for $6

I am Kaisar ! I am an On-Page SEO Expert,Especially on WordPress Website & static Website! Here I will professionally Optimize YourWebsite for all Search Engines Especially Google, Yahoo, Bing Search Engines. After completing On Page Search Engines Optimization, within Few Day, All Search Engines willIndex and Crawl Your Website. I Hope you know aboutSEO Optimization and you have a good knowledge about this topic. Nowadays, on-page SEO Optimization is more important than off page SEO Optimization. If you complete youron-page SEO optimization for your site. Just Order Me.ForThis Gig, I Will Do Following Tasks: Install Youst SEO / WordPress SEO by Youst or All in One S-E-O Plugin Meta Description Meta Keywords Meta Tag Optimize Images Images Alt Tag Site Verification Creating Sitemap.xml Robots.txt Optimization Google analytics setup Title Tag Optimization SEO Friendly URL Why My Service:Exceptional Service Quick Response Fast delivery Google Safe 100 % Google Index Iam a level 3 seller in this marketplace. So, I have enough experience for this type of job.

by: kaisar
Created: —
Category: Onsite SEO & Research
Viewed: 175


IPv6 static configuration (Ubuntu 19.04)

I’m trying to implement a network for a project where i need a server, a virtual machine running Ubuntu 19.04, with two static ipv4 and ipv6 addresses (one on each interface on the machine) to connect 2 subnet, but editing my /etc/network/interfaces file doesn’t seem to work.

At the moment my configuration is this:

auto enp0s8 iface enp0s8 inet static     address 192.168.20.10     netmask 255.255.255.0     network 192.168.20.0     broadcast 192.168.20.255     gateway 192.168.20.1  iface enp0s8 inet6 static     address fc00::2:0:0:0:a     netmask 64  auto enp0s9 iface enp0s9 inet static     address 192.168.30.10     netmask 255.255.255.0     network 192.168.30.0     broadcast 192.168.30.255     gateway 192.168.30.1  iface enp0s9 inet6 static     address fc00::3:0:0:0:a     netmask 64 

Using the command ip addr show ipv4 works fine but i can only see one of the 2 static ipv6 addresses (every interface also has its fe80: link-local address). How can i fix this?

Authenticate Static Public Keys

How can a static ECC public key be authenticated when being shared between the client (who has just created the static ECC public key) and the CA (Certification Authority) – who will sign and send the client’s static public key to another node in the network??

Background context: The client and another node will both generate ephemeral ECC keys for a ECDHE key exchange. The ephemeral ECC public keys will be signed with the static ECC keys to prove the authenticity of the ephemeral ECC keys. But when the static ECC keys are generated and sent to the CA, how can their authenticity be proven??