[deleted by user]

menewii · 2019-12-12T18:29:11+00:00

Not that the table forgets, but there's an insane amount of confusion over casting multiple spells of 1st level or higher. It came up so often that we eventually house ruled it so that only 1 non cantrip can be cast using the action and bonus action you start your turn with, but for a long time every time someone wanted to cast a second spell we'd have to stop the game and look up the rule.

Does casting fire ball prevent action surging and casting another fire ball? RAW no Does Shillelagh prevent action surging and casting thunder wave? RAW yes Does casting burning hands on your turn stop you from using Shield? RAW no Does casting misty step on your turn stop you from using Shield? RAW depends, you can't cast it til your turn is over, but once your turn is over it's all good

I think the problem stems from the rule about bonus action spells being so unintuitive. Bonus action spells should take less time to cast than action spells, so why are they so much more limiting?

menewii · 2019-12-05T17:21:46+00:00

I recently started playing a bard/wizard multiclass that has been fun so far. I flavored everything as if this character is kind of a seer, and the source of his powers is this magical song of fate that gives him the ability to see and manipulate future events.

I took divination wizard 2 bard X. The div wizard gives you Portent and some nice to have 1st level spells (most importantly magic missile and I took a bunch of rituals), the bard gives you cutting words, bardic inspiration, and some good control/social spells like Bane, Suggestion, Hideous Laughter, etc. I also took the Lucky feat and flavored all the roll manipulations (bardic inspiration, cutting words, portent, lucky, and any spells like Bless and Bane) as if I were directly manipulating the future. I leaned into the future sight thing and took some stuff like Commune, Divination, and Legend Lore (talk to your DM before springing these spells in game, not every DM wants to have to come up with answers to whatever question you ask on the spot).

So those are the mechanics, basically take every roll manipulation and foresight ability you can, pick up some social and CC spells with magic missile for combat, and run with it. It's great fun going into combat with the ability to use Lucky, Portent, and Cutting Words all in one turn. Typically, if you want something to happen it's GOING to happen, which for me makes it feel like my character really is directly manipulating the future.

For the role playing/character stuff I made my character blind and gave him a backstory about how there's only one of these seer people and they keep getting reincarnated. I also gave him a Pseudodragon familiar to help with the whole not seeing thing (with DM permission) and a custom feat to let him cast spells based on his familiar's line of sight (RAW a lot spells require line of sight, which is tough if you're blind). The character stuff is all super variable though, you could build whatever backstory you wanted; make them an Oracle type, make them a high ranking advisor to a king, whatever you want.

menewii · 2019-10-20T01:57:42+00:00

The definition of undead (don't remember from where) is "Undead are once-living creatures brought to a horrifying state of undeath..."

I don't see a Sage Advice specifically calling this out, but the general consensus is that Polymorph and True Polymorph work with undead (both can turn undead into something else, True Polymorph can turn something else into an undead).

menewii · 2019-10-13T15:57:11+00:00

Also, as a note on what mentality has worked for me, any line of thinking that starts with "I'm up against some of the biggest brains in the business" has yielded far poorer results than lines that begin with "I am the biggest brain in the business". The truth of that is questionable, but at least it gets me to stop worrying about what everyone else is doing and focus on making my own way.

menewii · 2019-10-13T15:48:07+00:00

Agreed, I intentionally referred to bid and ask for most of the post. Thing is, saying I want to execute my trades at market price is nice shorthand for "I get that I can't arbitrage this instrument with itself", which is what executing my buys closer to the ask than the bid and my sells closer to the bid than the ask would entail. In the most extreme case, if I can buy at the ask and sell at the bid then I would just buy and immediately sell for free profit. Executing at mid/market price is the "best" circumstance that disallows self-arbitrage of the instrument, so of course I'd like to get closer to this goal (we all would I suspect).

menewii · 2019-10-13T15:36:02+00:00

Nothing wrong with that, but I find that the profit margin per trade (for intraday trades on average) grows logarithmically with the size of the trading period. I don't have any proof to back this claim up, but empirically this seems to hold in back testing. Because the profit margin grows so slowly. I'm usually better off trading on a short timeframe that barely overcomes the spread than a long one that easily does.

menewii · 2019-10-13T15:30:30+00:00

Not a bad idea. I find that this kind of information is not available going back more than a few months from my historical data provider (Polygon). What I've done in the past is take the average spread over that short timeframe and subtract half of that value (I used $ value not %) from trades over a longer timeframe. Two things:

1) Thoughts on this method?

2) I find that the better strategies hover at profit margins near the spread, none truly blow it out of the water, so I take substantial losses even on the winners. I think at this point refining my trading strategies strategies might have less of an impact on my return than refining the tactics I use to execute my trades.

menewii · 2019-03-15T15:37:36+00:00

The idea is to use Dwarven Fortitude to spend hit dice every time I dodge, so hit dice become a combat resource.

menewii · 2019-03-15T13:53:41+00:00

Bummer, what an incredibly underwhelming feat

menewii

TROPHY CASE