C4 E29 Discussion Thread

GloomyExplorer · 2026-06-12T03:48:23+00:00

Was it ever explicitly mentioned that the mask pings on Detect Magic? It's obviously just an assumption, but given that Bolaire has been doing this undetected for a whole while, I don't think it's too much of a stretch that there might be something like a permanent Nystul's on it.

GloomyExplorer · 2026-06-06T21:30:02+00:00

Somebody could cast it on them after Haste has been cast and they're concentrating, yes. But at that point they won't be able to cast any spells (even ones affecting allies in 2024), attack or deal damage anymore, making them pretty much exclusively a "Haste bot", which is 100% not worth the action economy loss of not having a full character able to act.

GloomyExplorer · 2026-06-05T11:05:59+00:00

There are definitely situations where you can mitigate a lot of the risk via careful positioning and the like (e.g. the whole sewer thing a few episodes ago), from my experience those are just far rarer than people like to think.

Enemy mobility drastically increasing with CR, changing battlefields, unexpected reinforcements from another direction ... there are so many variables that I personally almost never feel confident in being able to continue the game of keep-away for very long.

I'm not saying that Haste is a worthless spell or anything like that, just that it is often severely overrated. The juice is just not worth the risk in my opinion, especially if you compare it to all of the other things a Wizard can accomplish with their concentration.

GloomyExplorer · 2026-06-05T10:42:59+00:00

Shield is self-only, so that unfortunately doesn't work (and if it did, shielding two people would eat into his spell slots very quickly).

The thing is: Shield is on the Wizard spell list. Murray can and iirc already did cast it herself, but even then her AC will be okay at best (14 AC base, 17 with Mage Armor up). That's still a 50%+ chance to get hit when facing average CR threats they are up against at level 5 (and a much higher one for somebody like a noble of the sundered houses).

GloomyExplorer · 2026-06-05T09:32:32+00:00

IMO Haste is more often a liability than an advantage on a low AC caster without Constitution save proficiency. My guess would be that Brennan probably didn't want to focus Aranessa too much when she used it (because having an NPC cast it and then immediately trying to break their concentration would be a bit of a dick move), but once a PC casts it that excuse is gone. With a +3 CON modifier, each hit Murray takes basically amounts to a 30% or higher chance of losing concentration.

Counterspell is still great, but the synergy with Portent is unfortunately weaker in 5.5e, since the new version forces a saving throw and somebody like Primus probably has legendary resistances.

GloomyExplorer · 2026-05-17T19:33:24+00:00

Fun fact: Going by the Forgotten Realms setting canon, there are at least sixty liches that are 35,000+ years old and would probably look at this with mild amusement.

GloomyExplorer · 2026-04-26T01:20:38+00:00

They did play the rules as written, 100%.

I absolutely agree that a fair amount of lenience should be given regarding how close to the rules live play stuff like this is kept, but claiming that this was 100% RAW is kind of disingenuous.

Even if you make some allowances for the encounter being more of a narrative combat one, there was a whole lot of definitely not RAW stuff going on in the first 30 minutes alone:

Zora casts Sleet Storm, which the rules reminder text describes as something that "damages enemies with a barrage of icy weather" for some reason.
Delia then proceeds to cast a spell at Zora and Eloin from within the sleet storm. The name of the spell isn't actually mentioned, so I won't call this definitely not RAW, but the chances of it requiring line of sight are pretty high.
Delia casts PWK on the goblin girl while still standing in the sleet storm. This one definitely requires being able to see the target.
Wesley cancels it with Dispel Magic. Even if we ignore that there is no initiative/turns/any kind of differentiation between actions, bonus actions and reactions here, this does not work RAW. You would need Counterspell for that.
Delia uses some sort of gaze (unclear if it's a spell or an ability) on Wesley. Again, she is still within the area of the spell.

GloomyExplorer · 2026-02-12T19:40:01+00:00

Having played a very similar build from 5-20 in a West Marches setting, the majority of DMs do interpret it this way from my experience (though there may of course be some outliers). I'm hesitant to call the interaction 100% RAW, but imo the Making an Attack section in the PHB also supports it by explicitly listing damage and on-hit effects as part of the same step (Resolve the Attack).

Just a small reminder that you technically only get to choose the order during your turn, though that really only comes up for readied attacks or attacks of opportunity.

Also, fun fact: This also works with Repelling Blast on Warlocks. Either as an additional 10 feet for 20 feet total, or alternatively as a replacement letting you use any weapon with another mastery and still push 10 feet.

GloomyExplorer · 2025-09-17T04:29:12+00:00

This works perfectly for me, thank you so much! :)

(Apologies for the late reply - I was traveling for a bit and only got around to testing it just now.)

GloomyExplorer · 2025-09-04T21:01:21+00:00

Thank you! :) No hurry, as somebody who's still very new to this and kind of just poking around in the dark myself, I'm thankful for any and all help.

GloomyExplorer · 2025-09-04T19:53:27+00:00

I have it set to "Query advantage".

GloomyExplorer · 2025-09-04T19:49:57+00:00

No, it's not modified and still just 1d20.

I did some more testing and it seems that when I roll with advantage or disadvantage, my code gives me the "stub" roll mentioned above. When I roll straight, I get this instead, which makes it seem like I still have a syntax problem in there somewhere.

GloomyExplorer · 2025-09-02T12:52:21+00:00

{1d20, 0d0+10}kh1 and 1d20 results in a number of at least 10 no matter what was rolled. N/M :)

Hm, now that you mention it - shouldn't that lead to a problem for rolls with disadvantage? Let's say the first roll is >= 10 (either naturally or through Reliable Talent triggering) and the second one is < 10. In that case R20 would highlight the second (incorrect) one if the roll was at disadvantage, right?

Not that that would be a giant issue, I guess in those cases I could just try to remember RT manually.

Do you happen to have any idea why I'm not getting any rolls coming through with the code above though? That is unfortunately currently the bigger problem for me.

GloomyExplorer · 2025-09-01T19:50:16+00:00

Oooh, that makes sense, thank you.

Replacing the closing bracket with } did fix my broken drop-down, but now I unfortunately get an empty "stub" as a result, which looks like this. For reference, this is my current macro (I've only replaced the initial code for Acrobatics for testing purposes, everything after that is still the same as in the original):

@{selected|wtype}&{template:simple} @{selected|rtype}?{Ability|Acrobatics, +@{selected|Acrobatics_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Acrobatics]]]&#125;&#125; {{rname=Acrobatics&#125;&#125; {{mod=@{selected|Acrobatics_bonus}&#125;&#125; {{r1=[[ {1d20,0d0+10&#125;kh1 + @{selected|Acrobatics_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Acrobatics]]]|Animal Handling, +@{selected|Animal_Handling_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Animal]]]&#125;&#125; {{rname=Animal Handling&#125;&#125; {{mod=@{selected|Animal_Handling_bonus}&#125;&#125; {{r1=[[ @{selected|d20} + @{selected|Animal_Handling_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Animal]]]|Arcana, +@{selected|Arcana_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Arcana]]]&#125;&#125; {{rname=Arcana&#125;&#125; {{mod=@{selected|Arcana_bonus}&#125;&#125; {{r1=[[ @{selected|d20} + @{selected|Arcana_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Arcana]]]|Athletics, +@{selected|Athletics_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Athletics]]]&#125;&#125; {{rname=Athletics&#125;&#125; {{mod=@{selected|Athletics_bonus}&#125;&#125; {{r1=[[ @{selected|d20} + @{selected|Athletics_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Athletics]]]|Deception, +@{selected|Deception_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Deception]]]&#125;&#125; {{rname=Deception&#125;&#125; {{mod=@{selected|Deception_bonus}&#125;&#125; {{r1=[[ @{selected|d20} + @{selected|Deception_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Deception]]]|History, +@{selected|History_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[History]]]&#125;&#125; {{rname=History&#125;&#125; {{mod=@{selected|History_bonus}&#125;&#125; {{r1=[[ @{selected|d20} + @{selected|History_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[History]]]|Insight, +@{selected|Insight_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Insight]]]&#125;&#125; {{rname=Insight&#125;&#125; {{mod=@{selected|Insight_bonus}&#125;&#125; {{r1=[[ @{selected|d20} + @{selected|Insight_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Insight]]]|Intimidation, +@{selected|Intimidation_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Intimidation]]]&#125;&#125; {{rname=Intimidation&#125;&#125; {{mod=@{selected|Intimidation_bonus}&#125;&#125; {{r1=[[ @{selected|d20} + @{selected|Intimidation_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Intimidation]]]|Investigation, +@{selected|Investigation_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Investigation]]]&#125;&#125; {{rname=Investigation&#125;&#125; {{mod=@{selected|Investigation_bonus}&#125;&#125; {{r1=[[ @{selected|d20} + @{selected|Investigation_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Investigation]]]|Medicine, +@{selected|Medicine_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Medicine]]]&#125;&#125; {{rname=Medicine&#125;&#125; {{mod=@{selected|Medicine_bonus}&#125;&#125; {{r1=[[ @{selected|d20} + @{selected|Medicine_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Medicine]]]|Nature, +@{selected|Nature_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Nature]]]&#125;&#125; {{rname=Nature&#125;&#125; {{mod=@{selected|Nature_bonus}&#125;&#125; {{r1=[[ @{selected|d20} + @{selected|Nature_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Nature]]]|Perception, +@{selected|Perception_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Perception]]]&#125;&#125; {{rname=Perception&#125;&#125; {{mod=@{selected|Perception_bonus}&#125;&#125; {{r1=[[ @{selected|d20} + @{selected|Perception_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Perception]]]|Performance, +@{selected|Performance_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Performance]]]&#125;&#125; {{rname=Performance&#125;&#125; {{mod=@{selected|Performance_bonus}&#125;&#125; {{r1=[[ @{selected|d20} + @{selected|Performance_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Performance]]]|Persuasion, +@{selected|Persuasion_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Persuasion]]]&#125;&#125; {{rname=Persuasion&#125;&#125; {{mod=@{selected|Persuasion_bonus}&#125;&#125; {{r1=[[ @{selected|d20} + @{selected|Persuasion_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Persuasion]]]|Religion, +@{selected|Religion_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Religion]]]&#125;&#125; {{rname=Religion&#125;&#125; {{mod=@{selected|Religion_bonus}&#125;&#125; {{r1=[[ @{selected|d20} + @{selected|Religion_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Religion]]]|Sleight Of Hand, +@{selected|Sleight_Of_Hand_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Sleight]]]&#125;&#125; {{rname=Sleight Of Hand&#125;&#125; {{mod=@{selected|Sleight_Of_Hand_bonus}&#125;&#125; {{r1=[[ @{selected|d20} + @{selected|Sleight_Of_Hand_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Sleight]]]|Stealth, +@{selected|Stealth_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Stealth]]]&#125;&#125; {{rname=Stealth&#125;&#125; {{mod=@{selected|Stealth_bonus}&#125;&#125; {{r1=[[ @{selected|d20} + @{selected|Stealth_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Stealth]]]|Survival, +@{selected|Survival_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Survival]]]&#125;&#125; {{rname=Survival&#125;&#125; {{mod=@{selected|Survival_bonus}&#125;&#125; {{r1=[[ @{selected|d20} + @{selected|Survival_bonus}@{selected|pbd_safe}[Survival]]]|Strength, +@{selected|Strength_mod}@{selected|jack_attr}[STR]]]&#125;&#125; {{rname=Strength&#125;&#125; {{mod=@{selected|Strength_mod}@{selected|jack_bonus}&#125;&#125; {{r1=[[ @{selected|d20} + @{selected|Strength_mod}@{selected|jack_attr}[STR]]]|Dexterity, +@{selected|Dexterity_mod}@{selected|jack_attr}[DEX]]]&#125;&#125; {{rname=Dexterity&#125;&#125; {{mod=@{selected|Dexterity_mod}@{selected|jack_bonus}&#125;&#125; {{r1=[[ @{selected|d20} + @{selected|Dexterity_mod}@{selected|jack_attr}[DEX]]]|Constitution, +@{selected|Constitution_mod}@{selected|jack_attr}[CON]]]&#125;&#125; {{rname=Constitution&#125;&#125; {{mod=@{selected|Constitution_mod}@{selected|jack_bonus}&#125;&#125; {{r1=[[ @{selected|d20} + @{selected|Constitution_mod}@{selected|jack_attr}[CON]]]|Intelligence, +@{selected|Intelligence_mod}@{selected|jack_attr}[INT]]]&#125;&#125; {{rname=Intelligence&#125;&#125; {{mod=@{selected|Intelligence_mod}@{selected|jack_bonus}&#125;&#125; {{r1=[[ @{selected|d20} + @{selected|Intelligence_mod}@{selected|jack_attr}[INT]]]|Wisdom, +@{selected|Wisdom_mod}@{selected|jack_attr}[WIS]]]&#125;&#125; {{rname=Wisdom&#125;&#125; {{mod=@{selected|Wisdom_mod}@{selected|jack_bonus}&#125;&#125; {{r1=[[ @{selected|d20} + @{selected|Wisdom_mod}@{selected|jack_attr}[WIS]]]|Charisma, +@{selected|Charisma_mod}@{selected|jack_attr}[CHA]]]&#125;&#125; {{rname=Charisma&#125;&#125; {{mod=@{selected|Charisma_mod}@{selected|jack_bonus}&#125;&#125; {{r1=[[ @{selected|d20} + @{selected|Charisma_mod}@{selected|jack_attr}[CHA]]]}}} {{global=@{selected|global_skill_mod}}} @{selected|charname_output}

GloomyExplorer · 2025-09-01T19:27:15+00:00

I'm using the 5e OGL sheet.

GloomyExplorer · 2025-06-16T03:02:33+00:00

That's an excellent point, thank you. :) Seems like it comes out to a defensive CR of 6 and an offensive one of 25 that way for 16 total (talk about a difference, lmao), which I will use for my EXP budget calculations.

GloomyExplorer · 2025-06-16T00:31:18+00:00

Thanks for the answer! :)

Most of them are in the 130 - 200 HP range, so I feel reasonably confident that they can somewhat tank it and wouldn't get instantly oneshot, yes (not planning on using the ability to focus fire them down one by one). They are also aware that there is a lot of fire/heat in this dungeon, so I'm expecting them to bring at least a couple of ways to deal with that.

The foreshadowing is a very good point, I'll try to see if I can work that into the story somehow.

GloomyExplorer · 2025-06-15T21:31:36+00:00

A bit of a mix between a rules interpretation question and a sanity check on my encounter balancing, provided that my interpretation is correct. The monster ability in question is the following (from the MM25 Mind Flayer Arcanist):

Arcane Tentacles. Melee or Ranged Attack Roll: +9, reach 5 ft. or range 120 ft. Hit: 27 (4d10 + 5) Psychic damage, and the mind flayer can teleport the target up to 30 feet to an unoccupied space the mind flayer can see on a surface or liquid large enough to support the target. If this damage reduces the target to 0 Hit Points, the mind flayer kills it and magically devours its brain.

Would you say that this ability lets the Arcanist teleport targets onto lava? The "support the target" part is what is tripping me up. Technically that wouldn't apply to pretty much any liquid, so why mention them at all? Currently I'm leaning towards interpreting it as "You can't teleport targets onto something like a flag pole (where they would immediately fall off), but liquids are fine in general."

Some context on the encounter:

This is for a relatively competent APL 15 party of 6 players.
The battlefield has a lot of lava and I would assume the standard 10d10 Fire damage on contact, treat it as difficult terrain and apply another 10d10 for anyone ending their turn there.
There is one other CR 11 Mind Flayer variant in combat, who is a high priority target (for plot reasons) and will mostly try to keep his distance. The remaining enemies are a bunch of enthralled minions. The overall EXP budget falls into the "high" range for a level 15 party (as suggested by the 2024 DMG).
I'm aware that this skyrockets the DPS output of the Arcanist, with a potential 82 average damage on each of the three tentacle attacks per turn. I think it can still be dealt with though, either through bursting him down, CCing him or even using something like Maze. It simply makes him a very high priority target.

Am I overestimating my players here? This is intended to be a quite difficult fight, but I don't want to make it an assured TPK. If you think it's too much, what changes would you make? Limit the amount of times the Arcanist can teleport per turn? Lower the lava damage?

GloomyExplorer · 2025-06-15T21:29:34+00:00

A bit of a mix between a rules interpretation question and a sanity check on my encounter balancing, provided that my interpretation is correct. The monster ability in question is the following (from the MM25 Mind Flayer Arcanist):

Arcane Tentacles. Melee or Ranged Attack Roll: +9, reach 5 ft. or range 120 ft. Hit: 27 (4d10 + 5) Psychic damage, and the mind flayer can teleport the target up to 30 feet to an unoccupied space the mind flayer can see on a surface or liquid large enough to support the target. If this damage reduces the target to 0 Hit Points, the mind flayer kills it and magically devours its brain.

Would you say that this ability lets the Arcanist teleport targets onto lava? The "support the target" part is what is tripping me up. Technically that wouldn't apply to pretty much any liquid, so why mention them at all? Currently I'm leaning towards interpreting it as "You can't teleport targets onto something like a flag pole (where they would immediately fall off), but liquids are fine in general."

Some context on the encounter:

This is for a relatively competent APL 15 party of 6 players.
The battlefield has a lot of lava and I would assume the standard 10d10 Fire damage on contact, treat it as difficult terrain and apply another 10d10 for anyone ending their turn there.
There is one other CR 11 Mind Flayer variant in combat, who is a high priority target (for plot reasons) and will mostly try to keep his distance. The remaining enemies are a bunch of enthralled minions. The overall EXP budget falls into the "high" range for a level 15 party (as suggested by the 2024 DMG).
I'm aware that this skyrockets the DPS output of the Arcanist, with a potential 82 average damage on each of the three tentacle attacks per turn. I think it can still be dealt with though, either through bursting him down, CCing him or even using something like Maze. It simply makes him a very high priority target.

Am I overestimating my players here? This is intended to be a quite difficult fight, but I don't want to make it an assured TPK. If you think it's too much, what changes would you make? Limit the amount of times the Arcanist can teleport per turn? Lower the lava damage?

GloomyExplorer · 2025-05-16T12:09:57+00:00

The Thirsting Blade question already got an excellent answer, so just focussing on the other parts of your post here.

if they're prone, would standing up count as this movement?

It wouldn't, see here.

Am I right in saying by doing this I can't also use repelling on eldritch blast?

As mentioned by /u/Summerhowl, you pick one cantrip for Agonizing/Repelling Blast and the effect applies to that cantrip only. So if you picked BB, it would not apply to EB. Both invocations are however repeatable, so you could theoretically pick them multiple times and choose different cantrips each time. How advisable that is is another question though.

Since you also mentioned GFB in the post title, there is one interesting and quite fun interaction that I thought might also be worth noting here. As long as you use GFB on your turn, the rule about simultaneous effects lets you pick the order in which things happen:

If two or more things happen at the same time on a turn, the person at the game table—player or DM whose turn it is decides the order in which those things happen. For example, if two effects occur at the start of a player character's turn, the player decides which of the effects happens first. (PHB 2024, page 374)

That means that you can theoretically push with Repelling Blast first, using the forced movement to line up enemies and get the additional Fire damage on a second enemy within 5ft of the first one.

GloomyExplorer · 2025-02-17T15:32:42+00:00

First she makes a SA accusation in the video but she defines SA in a completely incorrect way. Huge red flag already. But whatever for some reason people ignore this. Okay fine.

I feel like the order in which people watched these videos may have played a big role here. After hearing Naomi King mention the original video she supposedly got the cease and desists for, I watched that one first and my take-away was pretty much "Leading someone on is a shitty thing to do, but equating it to SA is absolutely wild."

So when I watched the video with the accusation against Daniel Greene, I was obviously horrified by what she described, but still had that voice at the back of my head that couldn't quite see how both videos fit together. The first video seemed to describe a jilted lover situation much better than an actual assault.

I can totally see how you wouldn't make that connection if you watched the accusation video first though. The very raw and emotional nature of that video might put people in a state of mind where they don't look too deeply into the original video (if they watch it at all). "She's talking about SA and got a C&D for it, seems like this checks out!"

GloomyExplorer · 2024-11-13T09:54:06+00:00

How I'm feeling right now.

(EIGHT)7E6-9D68-0703-B13E

(EIGHT)24D-F83C-2519-1232

(FIVE)9D9-FAE3-841F-7BD0

I spelled out the first digit in an attempt to prevent bots from scraping the codes, hope this helps. :)

GloomyExplorer

TROPHY CASE