dnd 5e – What would be the effects of changing the duration of a round from 6 seconds to 5 seconds?

1. Some encounters in published adventures are may be written assuming six seconds per round.

This is probably the most significant problem. I can give a couple examples. From Storm King’s Thunder, there is an encounter involving timed hazards:

Characters who have a passive Wisdom (Perception) score of 14 or higher notice gaps in the ceiling, suggesting the presence of two hanging blocks of stone. Characters who search for traps and succeed on a DC 14 Wisdom (Perception) check also notice these blocks, which constitute the temple’s outer defenses.

Each block is a 40-foot-tall, 40-foot-wide, 20-foot-thick slab held up by mechanisms buried in the mountainside. When the lever in area 2A is moved to the down position, the block of stone closer to the entrance (area 1) falls, sealing off the tunnel. When the lever in area 2B is moved to the down position, the inner block does the same thing. Each block takes about 6 seconds to drop to the floor, allowing time for creatures to get out of the way.

At 6 seconds per round, the party has a single turn each to get out of the way of the hazard. At 5 seconds per round, they potentially have two rounds (how are you going to adjudicate 1/5th of a round?).

We see a similar issue with an encounter in Tomb of Annihilation:

With a successful DC 15 Wisdom (Perception) check, a character discerns that the entire floor of the corridor is a single pressure plate. The adamantine propeller has AC 20, 30 hit points, and immunity to all damage except force damage. It thunders into motion whenever more than 20 pounds of pressure is placed on the corridor floor. Once activated, the propeller spins up to full speed in 6 seconds. If the weight is removed from the floor, the blades take a full minute to slow to a stop.

While the propeller is spinning up or slowing down, a creature can leap through a gap between two blades with a successful DC 20 Dexterity (Acrobatics) check. On a failed check, the character takes 33 (6d10) slashing damage as it passes through the blades.

Again, a timed hazard, where a 5 second turn potentially gives the party more time to avoid it.

2. It makes the Acquisitions Incorporated spell gift of gab a bit odd to rule:

When you cast this spell, you skillfully reshape the memories of listeners in your immediate area, so that each creature of your choice within 5 feet of you forgets everything you said within the last 6 seconds.

When used in combat, casting the spell would retcon anything you said on your last turn. If a turn is five seconds, now it can include words from the last two turns.

dnd 5e – Does being “paralyzed” grant the effects of a rest

To begin with, we must understand that the 10-hour paralysis is a homebrewed effect, and such a condition was decisively not in view when the rules for resting were written, but we can try to surmise the interaction between the written rules and this homebrewed effect.

On the surface, the rules for long rests make no mention of the paralyzed or incapacitated conditions. So in the strictest RAW sense, there isn’t a reason why you wouldn’t benefit from a long rest.

But we can make some inferences from the description of long rests to rule the other way:

If the rest is interrupted by a period of strenuous activity — at least 1 hour of walking, fighting, casting spells, or similar adventuring activity — the characters must begin the rest again to gain any benefit from it.

I would argue that suffering from a particularly potent paralysis poison for ten hours is going to fall somewhere in this category of “strenuous activity”, but maybe that depends on how your DM wants the poison to paralyze you. Do you simply lose nerve function in your body and can’t move, or does the poison violently lock up your muscles?

To determine if this paralysis falls under strenuous activity, you would have to ask the one who invented it.

settings – Disabling Noise reduction/echo cancellation/any other effects on the microphone input in smartphone

I have made a program that reads a fixed number of bytes from the microphone and sends it out to the speaker, effectively a program to route audio from the mic to speaker without any changes

Normally I can hear what I say into the microphone loud and clear on the attached headphone

However, if I blow into the microphone, I can momentarily notice the sound in the earphone going smaller, which slowly rises back to its normal volume

I think some kind of built in noise reduction or some other effect is kicking in when I blow into the microphone

Is there any way to completely stop or bypass any kind of preprocessing the phone does to the microphone input samples, or to the output samples?I have looked at all the sound related settings on the phone and they are all disabled, at least as far as I can tell. I use AudioRecord class to get microphone audio samples and AudioTrack to play them back. AudioRecord source is MediaRecorder.AudioSource.DEFAULT (MediaRecorder.AudioSource.MIC gives the same result). MediaRecorder.AudioSource.VOICE_RECOGNITION doesn’t seem to have any effects on the input sound, but I would have guessed that MediaRecorder.AudioSource.DEFAULT or .MIC would be the option without any preprocessing attached to it.

I would like to know if there is a way to completely prevent the phone from doing nay kind of audio processing, at the mic or the speaker side, through some option in the phone settings or through adb.

The phone is Samsung Galaxy S7 with android 8.0, but I am looking for a a general solution if it exists.

unity – Apply external effects to player movement

In a 2D downhill game with the following, custom movement code, how do I apply external effects to the player’s movement?

For example, when the player hits an obstacle, I want them to get bounced off the obstacle and briefly stop before they are able to continue moving. How do I best integrate those types of external effects into my movement code in a way that is scalable?

private void UpdatePlayerVelocity()
{
    // Calculate the player's vertical movement speed
    float speedY = maxSpeed.y * Time.fixedDeltaTime;

    // Calculate the player's horizontal movement speed
    float speedX = inputDirectionX * maxSpeed.x * Time.fixedDeltaTime;

    // Set the player's new velocity
    rb.velocity = new Vector2(speedX, speedY);
}

My player-obstacle collision is handled in the obstacle class, and I am using an action to notify the player about the collision. So I have the ability to have a corresponding method in the player class that get’s called when the collision occurs:

public void OnPlayerCollidedWithObstacle()
{
    // TODO:
    // Integrate the following into the above movement code ???
    // 1. Bounce the player off the obstacle
    // 2. Briefly stop the player from moving
    // 3. Continue moving
}

As a first step, I am thinking to wrap my default movement code in a bool check, so that it doesn’t get run when the collision movement code is run.

However, I was hoping for a better, more scalable way?

PS: I would like to keep my movement code custom, so no Unity physics / AddForce / etc.

dnd 5e – My players want extra effects from their attacks. What should I do?

I’m DMing for a group of 4 players. Two of them have played a fair bit of 5e before, and two of them are new. I’m also new to DMing, though generally familiar with the rules of 5e.

One of the new players is trying to get creative in combat, which I think is great! The problem is I’m not exactly sure how I should adjudicate some of her requests in a way that won’t break the game. Some examples of what I mean:

Can I make an unarmed strike and use my talons to scratch the enemy’s eyes and blind them?

I attack them in their Achilles’ heel and cripple them so they can’t walk?

Now I know that the RAW answer is “No, you can’t try that.” But that’s such a boring answer and I really hate to feel like I’m shutting down anything that isn’t just plain and simple attacks. In general, any time I say “No, you can’t do this”, I feel like I’m shutting down my players fun.

Like I said, I like that she’s trying to be creative in combat, but if an unarmed strike can potentially blind an enemy, that’s incredibly strong. And if the PCs can do this to enemies, it’s fair game for enemies to do this to PCs as well. I can think of some house rules to balance it off the top of my head (Higher AC to hit a small target, enemy can make a constitution saving throw to avoid the effect, etc.) but I don’t want to worry about proper balance while we’re in the middle of a combat.

What’s a good way for me to empower my players and make them feel like they actually have these choices in combat rather than shutting them down, but without breaking the game?

Proper workflow to export Niagara Effects in Unreal Engine 2.5

I’m currently learning to create effects in Unreal Engine, with Niagara to be more specific. I am still new to the engine in general and have been banging my head against the wall for a while now, because I can’t find any information regarding how to properly export assets for other people to use.

The only thing I find online is how to export your assets to be used in another project on your machine. But that’s not that interesting for me, because I am a freelance VFX Artist and want to send my clients the effects I created with them being able to just drag and drop the effects into their level.

I’m coming from Unity where exporting VFX is super easy with unity packages and I can’t seem to find something similar for UE. The team I am currently working with does not have experience in that field either and so far the only way we shared files was by zipping the folder that contains the VFX and then send that over. It works fine to some degree, but the annoying thing is that references seem to get messed up. For example, in the material the Texture Sample node does not have a texture selected or the mesh renderers in the niagara system are missing a mesh and an override material.

I feel like my current approach with packing the folder in zip is really unprofessional and not the way to do it. What’s the proper way to export a niagara system with all its dependencies?

dnd 3.5e – When do “one round” and “until end of turn” effects end?

I’m mainly concerned about the effects that last “one round” and “until the end of turn” (like Stone Bones ToB p.84 and Inferno Blade ToB p. 54, respectively). My guess is that “until end of turn” effects end after you’ve taken your “standard” actions (one swift action, one move action, one standard action, or whatever the duration equivalent would be, like a full-round action), so the reactions you take on that round are not affected by that effect. On the contrary “one round” effects would be in effect until it’s that PC’s turn again.

However, my DM insists that both effects would last until that PC’s turn comes again, having no distinction, even if it has different wording. So, really, what’s a round and what’s a turn in this case? Are they the same?

dnd 5e – Do effects with the duration of one minute end at the beginning or the end of your turn?

All effects with a fixed duration measurable in rounds end just before the beginning of one of your turns. (Otherwise, their duration would be too short to be a full round, or a full 2 rounds, etc.)

We can see this by looking at a duration of 1 round, and applying the same logic to the case of 10 rounds.

A duration of 1 round, measured in turns, is “each participant in a battle takes a turn” (PHB, p. 189) — or put another way, one turn each for you and everyone else. Since you enjoy the benefits of an effect like Rage on the turn you activate it, that’s one turn of effect for you; everyone afterward also “enjoys” the effect for their turn after you, until the end of the turn of the creature just before your next turn. When your next turn begins, you would be enjoying the effect for a second turn, therefore the 2nd round of the effect begins as your 2nd turn begins.

Thus the dividing line between the rounds, for an effect you enjoy on its first turn of activation, is just as/before one of your turns begins.

(There are a few exceptions, but these explicitly say when they end in relation to your turn. Most are single-round spells that alter your next action, which explicitly extend to the end of you next round so that they’re not useless — you can think of effects like that as beginning to be “enjoyed” by you and everyone else only after the end of your 1st turn.)

Now we can extend this out to 10 turns, to see that Rage ends just before your 11th turn begins. For simplicity, we’ll call the turn an effect starts “your 1st turn”, no matter how long combat has been.

  • A duration of 1 round begins on your 1st turn and ends just before the beginning of your 2nd (next) turn. Otherwise, it would not be a full round long.
  • A duration of 2 rounds begins on your 1st turn and ends just before the beginning of your 3rd turn. Otherwise, it would not be a full 1 rounds long.

    ⋮

  • A duration of 10 rounds begins on your 1st turn and ends just before the beginning of your 11th turn. Otherwise, it would not be a full 10 rounds long.

So in the case of rage, it ends just before you take your 11th turn, preventing you from enjoying 11 rounds of rage but allowing you to enjoy the full 10th round of your rage, including during everyone else’s turns.

dnd 5e – How does the target of “Planar Binding” subjectively experience the effects of the spell?

If the target of Planar Binding fails its Charisma saving throw, it “must follow your instructions to the best of its ability”.

How does the target experience the effects of the spell? What is the subjective psychological and physical impact on the target?

Having some understanding of how the target of the spell experiences “must follow your instructions” can help answer many questions related to this spell. Below, I pose various sub-questions meant to clarify (and add context to) the over-arching question of how the target experiences the effects. Note that there is not a great deal of RAW related to this (that I am aware of), so much of this will be answered with “it is up to DM discretion”. What I’m looking for is guidance around what is sensible in that context (preferably that aligns with game balance, related game mechanics, etc.)

The relevant portion of the spell description:

Planar Binding

… first paragraph snipped …

A bound creature must follow your instructions to the best of its ability. You
might command the creature to accompany you on an adventure, to guard a
location, or to deliver a message. The creature obeys the letter of your
instructions, but if the creature is hostile to you, it strives to twist your
words to achieve its own objectives. If the creature carries out your
instructions completely before the spell ends, it travels to you to report this
fact if you are on the same plane of existence. If you are on a different plane
of existence, it returns to the place where you bound it and remains there until
the spell ends.

… third paragraph snipped …

  1. Does the target feel an irresistible compulsion? The description specifically states that creatures hostile to the caster strive to twist the caster words to achieve its own objectives, so the magic of the spell does not magically make the target willing. Does that mean that if a command is antithetical to the nature of the target, they experience continual psychological distress in abiding by the commands of the caster? For example, if an evil Dao is subject to this spell and is commanded (among various other things) to “be kind to everyone you meet”, is this experienced by the Dao as torture? Or does the magic of the spell make it feel natural to do what is commanded of them?

  2. Suppose the caster has a long list of instructions for the target (see “How can an entity bound by Planar Binding be prevented from betraying the caster?” for an example). The spell states “… must follow your instructions to the best of its ability“, which to me implies that it is possible for mistakes to be made. Depending on the intelligence of the target, keeping such a list in mind at all times and being able to see the interactions between competing commands will sometimes be beyond their intellectual abilities in the moment (no matter how intelligent) and they may therefore unintentionally violate some command at some point. What happens to them if this occurs? Are they wracked with guilt? Do they suffer psychic damage? Or are there zero consequences in this situation?

  3. A somewhat related spell is Geas, which specifically states “While the creature is charmed by you, it takes 5d10 psychic damage each time it acts in a manner directly counter to your instructions”. Since Planar Binding does not have any such verbiage, can we assume it is simply impossible for the entity to intentionally violate instructions? If so, how is this experienced by the target? If it is not magically impossible for them to intentionally act counter to instructions, what does keep them from doing so? If their personalities remain intact (as suggested by their attempts to twist words), commands dictated by the caster will inevitably chafe (especially those antithetical to their ethos). So what keeps them from rebelling if it isn’t physical damage, etc.?

  4. Each of Command (1st level enchantment), Suggestion (2nd level enchantment, Compulsion (4th level enchantment), Geas (5th level enchantment), Planar Ally (6th level conjuration) and Mass Suggestion (6th level enchantment) spells specifically disallow “obviously harmful” and/or “suicidal” commands, but Planar Binding (abjuration) does not (note that Planar Binding is the only abjuration spell on the list). Does this mean the target is forced to perform even a suicidal command, or do we read in this exclusion as unintented missing text?

  5. Is the target aware of the binding? There is no explicit mention in the spell description of the target being aware, but the effects of the spell seem like they would be pretty obvious to the target (unless the magic is masking these effects). It all comes back to the question “how does the target experience the effects of this spell?”.

  6. Of the 50+ abjuration spells, a few include effects that influence the behavior of creatures, including ProtectionFromEvilAndGood (disadv on attack rolls), Sanctuary (must make Wisdom save to make attack), and Magic Circle (certain creatures cannot willingly enter AofE, disadv on attacks). Can answering similar questions about how creatures experience the effects described in those spells help shed light on what happens in Planar Binding.

  7. All of these questions are made more pointed when the spell is cast at a higher level. If the entity is bound for 30 days (7th level), 1/2 year (8th level) or 1 year + 1 day (9th level), the question of how the target experiences the spell are more relevant, as it influences how they behave, whether they go into a deep depression, how much planning they can perform to escape the spell (especially when commanded not to engage in such planning), etc.

Here are some initial thoughts as to answers (sadly, they generate more questions). Where do these answers run counter to RAW and/or RAI?

  1. I’m highlighting the fact that Planar Binding is abjuration rather than enchantment, and assuming that this implies some external forcing function enforces the magic rather than the magic affecting the mind of the target (as would happen for an enchantment). But I do not know what this “external forcing function” is (having Mystra have to consciously monitor and enforce every occurrence of every such command seems untentable), and such an external forcing function would seem to suggest that it wouldn’t be possible for the entity to unintentionally violate a command either (but the wording of the spell suggests they can, because of the “to the best of its ability” phrasing). So I’m left with no satisfactory answer to exactly what the target experiences. I do think that commands antithetical to the creature would be experienced as torture (which is disconcertingly horrifying to contemplate, if a Ki-Rin is bound and forced to torture innocence, for example).

  2. The spell does not mention anything about damage, so in situations where the target unintentionally violates a command, I am assuming zero consequences. It can be an opportunity for the caster to ask for an explanation of how the commands were interpreted by the target, and to clarify commands for the future.

  3. The simpliest ruling would be that it is impossible for a creature to intentionally violate the commands (leaving the mechanism unspecified), but that leaves open the question of how the creature experiences this. If they normally lie all the time, but are commanded to tell the truth, do they start to lie only to find the truth coming out of their mouths instead? Or does the thought of lying simply not cross their mind because of the magic of the spell? Does telling the truth feel natural or unnatural? Is the target aware they are doing something contrary to their normal behavior?

  4. Since spells exist that explicitly disallow suicidal/harmful commands, but Planar Binding does not provide such wording, it would seem that this does indeed mean that the target will perform such acts. I would, however, rule that they are allowed another save to break the spell anytime this happens (maybe even at advantage).

  5. It seems more reasonable for the target to be aware of the effects of the spell. On the other hand, if the target is NOT aware of the spell, it means that it feels completely natural to them to perform the actions dictated by the instructions provided by the caster. This resolves many of the other questions (they do not feel mental anguish over following instructions counter to their normal behavior, etc.). So, although the more reasonable answer is awareness, there is a part of me that wants a lack of awareness, because this feels like such a horrifying kind of torture to inflict on something.

  6. If a creature attacks someone who has Sanctuary cast on them, how does the creature experience the magical effect? Game mechanically, they need to make a saving throw, but what is the in-game analog of that save? Are they conscious of some impediement, or does it just feel completely natural for them to attack someone else, without being aware that their behavior was affected by magic? I don’t know the answer to that … I feel another SE question in the making…

  7. I can’t imagine how horrifying it would be to be bound by a caster with an opposite alignment forcing me to do things every day that are antithetical to my ethos. Suicide would be a natural response … except that the caster could command me not to attempt suicide. It is the reason I’m tempted to rule in #5 that the target feels completely natural performing the actions commanded of it.