This Paladin PC sounds too OP. If they are, how can I fix it?

I just constructed a Level 5 Human Paladin character for one of my players and this is what I got.

His base stats are:

  • STR 15
  • DEX 14
  • CON 18
  • INT 14
  • WIS 17
  • CHR 12

This was done by using the 4d6 minus the lowest number method.

He has an Armor Class of 18 because he has Chain mail armor and a shield.

He chose Oath of The Ancients and thus has ensnaring strike, speak with animals, moonbeam and misty step as well as choosing bless and shield of faith. He also talks celestial.

His flaw is that he puts others before himself and will always jump in front of danger to save one of his companions but even with that, having 65 hit points (obtained through rolling) and an armor class of 18 while having the strength and proficiency to not be over encumbered.

The part the really confuses me is that he has 30 speed, while wearing heavy armor and carrying a large shield; all because of his strength and proficiency’s.

This all sounds way too powerful for Level 5; am I wrong? And if I’m not, how could I balance this, preferably without telling the player to change his character (like fighting enemies that exploit a certain loophole in the character’s build)?

Does the target choose which side they move to for Wall of Ice?

The description for Wall of Ice states

“If the wall cuts through a creature’s space when it appears, the creature within its area is pushed to one side of the wall and must make a Dexterity saving throw. On a failed save, the creature takes 10d6 cold damage, or half as much damage on a successful save.”

For both Wall of Stone and Wall of Force the spells specificity it is “Your choice” which side they arrive on, with Wall of Stone triggering a Dex save to see if they can avoid it. Wall of Ice’s save only state doing damage, but nothing about getting a chance to escape.

Does that lack of specifying the caster’s choice mean that it is the target’s choice by default? Do creatures surrounded by the walls not get a chance to escape as long as they are untouched?

My current reading is that if a target is hit by the wall they can escape freely, but if you can enclose the targets without the wall touching them they would be trapped without a save to escape. Would that be correct?

Does the creature in room 27 of White Plume Mountain use the magic items they have?

Room 27 contains a creature who has some additional items listed as treasure:

Are those items active on the creature (changing some of their stats and giving some additional options)? Or are those not meant to be active/used and to be given as treasure?

If they do use them, does that adjust their CR?

Assign resources that each have a certain amount of work they can provide to tasks that require a certain amount of work

I’m attempting to do a hobby automation project and have come to a roadblock. I have a certain problem I need to solve, but can’t think of the solution nor what the name for the problem would be.

Say we have n tasks where each task requires $ x_i$ amount of work to be done and m resources where each resource can provide $ y_j$ work. The total amount of work required will equal the the total amount of work the resources can provide, i.e. $ \sum_{i=1}^{n} y_i = \sum_{j=1}^{m}x_j$ . For all j from 1 to m, $ y_j \in \left \{1, 2, 6, 12, 24\right \}$ and each $ x_i = a*1 +b *2 + c*6+d*12+e*24$ . I was looking at task assignment problems, but those seemed to be a bit overkill since they were concerned with optimization where I’m just simply trying to slot the correct blocks in the right place so that I don’t have tasks that are given too few or too many resources.

My current guess is that you can iterate over each task, and give it the largest resource available that doesn’t go over the amount of work that is left for the task to be completed. It’s almost analagous to filling a jar with different sized rocks; the best way is to start with the largest rocks and then go down in size from there, so that the smaller rocks fill in the space between the larger ones. Am I not taking something into consideration that complicates this problem further? I’m sorry if this is an obvious one, but I’m a hobbyist programmer and couldn’t think of the name of the problem or of a good set of keywords to google. The closest I could find is task assignment so far.

Are Half-Elves supposed to have a slender build like Elves, or are they supposed to have a build that’s intermediate between Humans and Elves? [5e]

The Player’s Handbook’s weight descriptions for Half-Elves are inconsistent. The Half-Elf section in Chapter 2 (pg. 38) says:

They range from under 5 feet to about 6 feet tall, and from 100 to 180 pounds, with men only slightly taller and heavier than women.

However, the “Height and Weight Range” table in Chapter 4 (pg. 121) gives a weight formula for Half-Elves of 110 + (2d8) x (2d4), which is 114 to 238 pounds.

This is very different.

Do we have any reason to label one description Correct and the other A Mistake? The 2018 PHB Errata are silent on this point.

Looking at the rest of the table’s formulas, Humans are 114 to 270 lbs, whereas Wood Elves are 102 to 180 lbs and High Elves are 92 to 170 lbs. (I’ve excluded the Drow because they’re significantly shorter.)

So are Half-Elves supposed to have a slender build like elves (100-180 lbs), or are they supposed to have a build that’s intermediate between Human and Elf (114-238 lbs)?

[As a side note, changing the Half-Elves’ weight modifier in the table from its current 2d4 (which is like a Human’s) to only 1d4 (like the Wood and High Elves’) would yield a calculated range of 112 to 176 pounds.]

Players get frustrated when they couldn’t solve a hard diplomatic problem, how to get them to think out of the box

Problem:

Players got themselves into a diplomatic problem that they know is probably above their pay grade in terms of difficulty. They spent a session trying to figure out this problem with talking to people, and rolling different charisma checks in order to try to persuade people they probably had no business persuading (rolls were average, arguments weren’t extremely compelling). The party didn’t plan any grand schemes, any extraordinary strategies, no clever ideas on the spot, but rather tried very basic head first dialogue.

This has happened in the past in regards to combat, and the party has with a recent deadly encounter had to think out of the box more (one player even said: “guys we need to plan more and think less about just hacking and slashing sometimes”). Now it’s a more diplomatic problem that doesn’t seem as easy as rolling a single charisma check and hoping it works out.

In the end, the party did not manage to solve the diplomatic problem (although there is room in the future for them to try again with the upper hand), and one of the players said they did not enjoy the session. Player enjoyment is my top priority. But I also think dnd is best when there’s risk, when you can fail rolls, when the PCs don’t always win (not that I actively seek this out though).

How can I get the party to perform less linearly in dialogue-related problems?

An example problem:

P: If trying to out smart a bad person with a lot of influence in the town

A: There are options for framing the person, bribing people, seeking dirt on this person to find their weakness, tarnishing their reputation, trying to prove their wrong doing by seeking out evidence, and a bunch of other possibilities.

I’ve tried to have a brief session-0 talk again about if they want dialogue-related problems handicapped, and they didn’t seem to take to that, but rather felt like they tried everything and didn’t know what else to do. I also did a postmortem on this problem and tried to give different options they could have tried, but I get a feeling the players feel like they still tried everything and failed and the session was “a waste” (even though they still got exp, still got some loot, and got some more plot).

Kind of at a loss of how to tackle this issue that isn’t just: “Go watch some dnd podcasts to get ideas, or go read X, Y, and Z resource on the subject”.

Is it possible to use a whip as an instrument because it creates a “sonic boom?” Furthermore, can they attack while “performing?”

I noticed that a whip when used creates a sonic boom. The definition of a musical instrument is as follows

A musical instrument is a device created or adapted to make musical sounds. In principle, any object that produces sound can be considered a musical instrument—it is through purpose that the object becomes a musical instrument.

Under performance it reads

Your Charisma (Performance) check determines how well you can delight an audience with music, dance, acting, storytelling, or some other form of entertainment.

Because of this, I was wondering if I could do something akin to a bladedancer with whips for dancing and use my charisma modifier to attack as my character danced around the battlefield. As far as I know, that’s not an option in 5e (at least not with officially available material, but material allowed under unearthed arcana would work.

If an altered bladedancer is not an option, I was thinking maybe bard/ranger (bard 1st) with war caster feat and dual wielding. Would this work?

Can a creature take turns as normal if they are inside an Antimagic Field while another creature casts Time Stop?

Time stop is a spell that stops time for other creatures, allowing one creature to take multiple turns in a row. It says:

You briefly stop the flow of time for everyone but yourself. No time passes for other creatures, while you take 1d4 + 1 turns in a row, during which you can use actions and move as normal.

Certainly, this is a magical effect. The spell causes the flow of time to stop for other creatures, and while you are taking multiple turns, no time flows for them. I imagine antimagic field can defeat it. The relevant text says:

Spells. Any active spell or other magical effect on a creature or an object in the sphere is suppressed while the creature or object is in it.

So, imagine combat between Annie, Tim, and Charlie. Ordinarily, initiative might look something like this:

Annie → Charlie → Tim

Suppose Annie casts time stop and rolled a 1 on their d4. Thus, they take 2 turns in a row. Initiative would look like this:

Annie → Annie → Charlie → Tim

Now imagine that Tim cast antimagic field, and following their turn, Annie casts time stop. Suppose they rolled a 1 on their d4 so that they can take 2 turns in a row. What would the initiative order look like?

Here are some possible resolutions I can think of, but none satisfy me totally:

  1. Time stop defeats antimagic field. The initiative order is: Annie → Annie → Charlie → Tim. The reason this is unsatisfactory is that time stop shouldn’t seem to prevail because it’s a spell, and antimagic field defeats spells.

  2. Time stop cannot be cast while there is an active antimagic field, because there exists some creatures you can’t stop time for. The reason this is unsatisfactory is there is no rule that prevents these two spells from being active at the same time. Also, since things like beholders exist, it’s not unreasonable to say there is almost always an active area of antimagic somewhere in the world, and that means time stop can almost never be used.

  3. The caster of time stop and antimagic field take their turns as normal while everyone else is frozen in time. Thematically and narratively, this seems the most logical. So we go through the turn order, treating every turn Alice would have taken as one full round. For this scenario, since Alice takes two turns in a row, then we can imagine two rounds going by. Ordinarily, everyone but Alice takes a turn, but now we unfreeze anyone inside an area of antimagic. So initiative would be: Annie (time stop starts) → Charlie (frozen in time) → Tim (unfrozen) → Annie (time stop ends) → Charlie → Tim. The reason this is unsatisfactory is because we’re advancing the “round count” now, which feasibly triggers things like lair actions that activate on a certain initiative count. It does have the side effect of allowing Tim to act normally though, affecting other creatures if he wants, because he isn’t bound by time stop and Annie isn’t the one doing the violations of the rules of the spell.

  4. There is no answer to this question, and this is solidly in the zone of DM adjudication. This is unsatisfactory because, well, all questions answered that way tend to be unsatisfactory.

So which is it? Or is it an option I haven’t listed here? Can Tim take turns as normal while inside an antimagic field if Annie casts time stop?

i like to know when microsoft going stop montoring our computers, and takeing files that they no right to

do u know how impossable it is to disable windows tracking. most u think just moveing few setting u done, currently there is over 100 gpo settings that must be eather turn on of off, then gpo must be appled to computer, forget firewall microsoft servers are hardcoded in the os, u must disable all task,in trasmiting information, go to regisitery disable termaml server setting start up to 4 and if this not enouf u have block access to rdp, ftp as on all computers there is a active ftp server weather or not u installed it and a acktive http server, now we have other probems remote cmd, remote power shell. all office sends out to microsoft servers, currently there over 7000 data centers that some share with apple and cisco, microsoft will take passwords user names and encription certifices i have logs showing they do just this, that they tied linux in to windows was better way to access bouth os, as there servers gose on and off line takeing bits of infomraiton, over time they can vr your hole system and wach all u do and they do have abuilt to wach what u do and recored it, micrsofot admited to hacking with nsa they was supose to remove remote desktop but the move past this they found new way accessing all the computers, worse is nsa not only ones gets all your information, most gose to chana u all did know most all the code is writen in chana so is apple and cisco, and we ask why is it so easy to get hack, these busness would never pay to have a hack proof software as i did offer a way for them to do it, that system would be totaly trasparnet, but then microsoft could not get the files eather, so how beat microsoft at there own game, what i do is find microsoft certifices and remove remote access and access to the encraption system and to athenacattion, but they can target any server or pc, and sence they recored what u do they undo just about anything, so why trust micrsoft now i can prove microsoft did for two years target my network, i do have logs to prove it, was no hacker and microsoft them selfs said yes they was on my network logs prove it , as they work with cisco becomes hard to block them , now i like know why micrsooft keeps changeing sercruty settings on my network i do have there remote login certifices and ip address and they montor all gpo set ups why, u all have no right to this informaton so why are u takeing it, so again why trust microsoft

When did Monks make their first appearance in D&D, and how do they differ between editions?

My curiosity continues after asking When did Rangers make their first appearance in D&D, and how do they differ between editions? Also, see about Druids and Artificers. This series of question is based on the initial question regarding Warlocks by aaron9eee:

A quality answer would have more than just a release date, and would ideally cover what makes each edition’s version different from other editions.

When did Monks make their first appearance in D&D, and how do they differ between editions?