what creatures copy themselves

I found the dopplerat which is perfect but its from a 3rd party book.

The only official creature i can find that does anything like this is the black pudding with its split rule.

Are there any official creatures, from any WOTC published material that have a similar ability to copy themselves?

The copies will need to have turns, take actions and be target-able. Really a full creature in itself.

I am specifically not looking for illusions that just cause attacks to miss like the mirror image spell.

Why does PHP’s strtotime() not understand a Unix timestamp? Or: Why don’t programming languages support “versions” of themselves? [closed]

Yes, I know that strtotime returns a Unix timestamp from a "time string". However, there are numerous situations where I’ve fed a semi-unknown "time string" into it and been baffled when I got a bool(false) returned instead of it just returning the same integer back:

$  current_timestamp = time(); var_dump(strtotime($  current_timestamp)); 

Output:

bool(false) 

I have long since made a wrapper function to strtotime, as I have done with every single PHP function I use, which handles this for it, so it’s not a practical problem for me anymore. However, it’s very interesting to me how this kind of situation can happen.

Why do such smart people (no, this is not sarcasm), who are able to create a highly advanced and complex programming language, which I could never do myself even if I got 50 years of "paused time" from now to do it, just seem to "overlook" many such basic "details"?

Is this another case of "we knew about it early on, and agree that it was not right, but people had begun expecting this bad behaviour from the function, and then we couldn’t change it, and as time went by, it became less and less possible"?

I’m very torn about things like this. This particular thing I find idiotic, but there is a good point against changing things around. Just look at the nightmare that is Python. I wouldn’t want to have to constantly try to re-read the manual for every single PHP function I use, wondering if PHP 8.1 or something has changed the parameter order around or something evil like that. If I have to choose between that or fix things myself, I choose the latter.

I just wish that language authors, and in particular PHP since it’s what I use, would just introduce some kind of "legacy mode" where the old/original versions of functions are kept around in the "engine", but only activated unless the user does <?php8 for their scripts, or something like that. Or maybe set a configuration option, to make the source code files less ugly. That seems like a perfect compromise to me. Why is that not actually done?

Remote APIs, such as Stripe (payment-related), frequently have "versions" where old ones are supported for ages/ever, so why can’t local programming language engines also do that?

Can a person attuned to Living Gloves cast Remove Curse on themselves to remove them?

The living gloves (E:RftLW, pg. 278) have the feature Symbiotic Nature:

The gloves can’t be removed from you while you’re attuned to them, and you can’t voluntarily end your attunement to them. If you’re targeted by a spell that ends a curse, your attunement to the gloves ends, and they can be removed.

If I am attuned to the living gloves and know the spell remove curse, would casting remove curse on myself count as voluntarily ending my attunement to them?

This is a follow up to this question, wherein a process for achieving ready access to all artisan tool proficiencies is described using remove curse to unattune to the living gloves.

Can objects step sideways by themselves?

In my Werewolf game, the players have to assassinate someone. A rank 1 theurge wants to shoot the target with a sniper rifle.

But they want to make the bullet a talen that enters the Umbra when it’s fired, then exits just before it hits its target. Their theory is the bullet will be invisible and can pass though walls.

As this sounds like a very Glass Walker or Weaver tech thing to do, is there anything in the core rules or supplements that would allow or disallow this (like a variant of the rank 4 gift “Grasp From Beyond”)?

My instinct is to rule “no”, but I’d prefer to have concrete grounds for doing so, as I hate being an arbitrary judge.

Thanks.

In the Forgotten Realms, how did elven populations feed themselves?

I’m building a world for a future campaign, it will feature elven civilizations. In order to place and design cities, I wish to know how FR handled food in elven populations.

1. What do elves eat? Are they vegetarians, meat eaters, mix of both?

2. Did elves practice farming? Are there stories of elves cultivating fields, planting crops…

3. Did elves raise livestock?

4. Do elves eat as much as humans?

To be more clear, I’m specifically interested in examples from sources canon to the Forgotten Realms, or from rule books.

Received email addressed to someone else from themselves

My outlook account received a suspicious email, addressed to somebody else, AW, sent apparently from themselves to themselves.
The sender is not an outlook address, but I guess outlook might be hosting their service.
According to haveibeenpwned my email address has not been pwned, neither has that of the sender.
AW appears to be the name of a university professor. I have never attended that university, nor do I know the person.
An online search for the linked address leads to a lobbying group in the USA. Also some websites in Brazilian Portuguese.
Clearwebstats claims the website with the linked domain name is safe to browse. (is worth 8.95$ and makes 0.15$ per day)

Why / How is this an exploit?
What is the goal of such an exploit?
How does it work?

enter image description here

If a character casts Fog Cloud around themselves before moving away from an enemy, do they provoke an opportunity attack?

Our party was forced to brawl against a group of orcs in order to gain their respect to speak with their chieftain (long story, we had very good reason for doing this). It then became a battle royale.

Our wizard was at low health and next to our paladin, and had the idea to cast fog cloud to capture himself and the paladin within it so he could leave combat. He cast the spell, and then came down to the debate of whether the paladin would get an opportunity attack even though she was blinded.

The wizard was in threat range, but does an effect that causes an area to become heavily obscured cause the Paladin to lose threat range and the wizard be able to successfully flee to another area of the ring?

Or does the paladin still have threat range and attack the wizard, even with fog cloud covering both of them?

I looked over the rules for 15 minutes after this situation, but nothing came up. It was ruled in-game that it was fine to make an opportunity attack with disadvantage, but that just doesn’t feel right. She might have heard the wizard stepping away, but the fog cloud was already in place. By the D&D rules, would the paladin have been able to make the opportunity attack or not?

Are theorem provers themselves “proven”?

I am not very well versed in the world of theorem proving much less automated theorem proving, so please correct me if anything I say or assume in my question is wrong.

Basically my question is are automated theorem provers themselves every formally proven to work with another theorem prover, or is there just an underlying assumption that any theorem prover was just implemented really really well, extensively tested & reviewed, etc. and so it “must work”?

If so, does there always remain some underlying doubt in any proof proven by a formally verified automated theorem prover as the formal verification of that theorem prover still lies on assuming that the non-formally verified theorem prover was correct in its verification of the former theorem prover, even if it might technically be wrong – as it was not formally verified itself? (That is a mouthful of a question, apologies)

I am thinking of this question in much the same vein as bootstrapping compilers.