If you wish to discuss any of my rulings or just any rules, post in this thread. If discussions related to rulings happen to crop up naturally in the OOC, they will be moved to this thread to avoid bogging it down.

Everyone can feel free to interject and challenge anything posted here or in the Rulings thread. And while I can't guarantee you'll change my mind, I'll nevertheless engage with you.
This message was last edited by the GM at 22:31, Mon 07 June 2021.

Okay, since the thread is here, we might as well use it :)



From this it is my understanding that she cannot move (Ready a Dash) and cast Produce Flame (and hurl it, which is fully allowed according to the spell's description) in the same Readied Action.

Unless you choose to object to this, here are my three proposals:

1. Ready the cast of Produce Flame and drop the movement completely. She already has line of sight to the rear-most troll and is just barely within range (30 feet from edge to edge), and I'll say she has Half Cover due to being positioned by a corner of the building, granted the Troll cannot get to a position where the corner is not in the way, which, spoiler alert, it can't, because it only has 30 feet of movement. It is worth bearing in mind that its Cold Aura does not care for AC.
   
2. Expend your full movement or parts of it to get to safety.
   
3. Completely forego Readying an Action and use your Action to cast Produce Flame instead, then expend your movement to retreat.

This message was last edited by the GM at 15:18, Mon 07 June 2021.

Mallory isn't readying a Dash, she's just specifying her own 30' movement.  5' out into range, then 25' back into cover.  That said, I realize my own flub on the matter now that I turn it over in my head again: the Ready Action turns one's Action into a conditional Reaction that can be delayed until the start of their next turn.  But one can only Move on their own turn.

In this case, Mallory is a bit out of luck.  She's 5' out of range to hit the Ice Troll from where she is presently, so she has to move in order to get within firing distance.  She can conjure the spell and just hold onto it (keeping it shrouded to prevent its light from giving away her position) but there's no way for her to toss it before the start of her next turn.  If Mallory retreats in any manner, she'll continue to be out of range to make her spell of any immediate use before the Ice Trolls have the chance to start wrecking shop.



Edge to Edge may qualify for certain spells, but the spell text here states that the Target Creature itself must be within 30' to be valid.  The Ice Troll is 35' away at the closest square.

In the end, ah well.  It's just one of those tough breaks that comes part and parcel with strategy combat games.  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


Naturally, but I'm really banking on the hope that Cold Aura does care for buildings being in the way and not being able to permeate straight through several feet of obstructing matter.

Unless you ready a Dash :) which was the reason I specified this in my earlier post.


Yeah . . . I realize this in hindsight. I was just trying to toss you bone, honestly. I admit that it would have set a fairly bad precedent.


Through solid walls? Definitely not. But around a corner and over some stray barrels and sacks? Without a shadow of doubt.

While I certainly appreciate the sentiment, the fact that we even have a separate thread just for us to prattle on about rules should emphasize how much of a stickler I am for consistency of applied mechanics.  I might fish for Advantage regularly, but I won't fudge the rules even for my own sake.

In response to msg #593 in the OOC thread:

Oof, you're asking some tough questions. Let's try to work through this.

Arcane Baseball




The only description both Fire Bolt and Produce Flame offers is the word "hurl". So this is ultimately interpretive. In fact, since Fire Bolt doesn't specify it requires vision of the target either, I would say the two cantrips are very similar and would follow the same criteria. If a cast of Produce Flame can be lobbed, so too can the mote of a Fire Bolt.


Vision, Cover, and Spellcasting


In this situation, it is more appropriate to apply the Cover rules as opposed to some strange, selective variant of the Blinded Condition, even though both stem from a lack of vision. However, Cover implies something more; one or several obstacles that hinders Attacks and certain Spell Casting.



That particular roof valley seems to me from my drawing like it's a bit lower compared to the rest of the building. (https://i.imgur.com/aUTzeTN.png, the difference in height is indicated by the dotted line.) If this had not been the case, I would have given the northernmost Troll Three-Quarters Cover, and the southernmost Troll Total Cover because of the difference in how they carry themselves. But seeing as it isn't the case (and ignoring the fact that Mallory's vantage point could change the amount of vision she has access to), I will give the southernmost Troll Three-Quarters Cover from the same roof, and the northernmost Troll Half Cover. (+2 to AC) Which means Mallory has vision of it.


But What if the Trolls Did Have Total Cover?
Total Cover means Mallory would not have vision of them. What would happen? Could she still Attack the Trolls? The answer, as it turns out, is no:





Confusion arises from the fact that some spells define that only targets you can see are valid (Magic Missile, for example). Produce Flame does not, but it appears to me that it would still require an unobstructed path to the target, which Total Cover does not grant. It just so happens that in this case, Total Cover obscures sight, but there's still a valid trajectory (above the rooftop). It also depends on how you define Total Cover; if you say only an enclosing box counts as Total Cover, then it becomes easy, as there's no longer a valid trajectory. But that's not how I interpret it. A narrow, solid wall that reached to the heavens would count as Total Cover if it completely obscured a creature behind it, even if there could exist some theoretical spell that could zip around it, in the same way Produce Flame could be tossed and arc over a roof because of gravity.


Astre to the rescue . . . ?


Good question, one I had to look up the answer for.

And by RAW, I don't think a Help Action could enable an Action that the benefactor would otherwise be unable to perform. It can only grant Advantage on an Ability Check or Attack Roll. Furthermore, Astre cannot grant Advantage on the Attack Roll because he is not within 5 feet of the Trolls.



This could easily be circumvented by just moving Astre. We could say he swoops in within 5 feet, and, because of the wording of the Ice Trolls' Cold Aura, he would not suffer the Cold Damage.



Keep in mind this is all just going by RAW. It makes sense to me that Astre could provide Advantage because he can communicate otherwise unknown information. I would say this is not properly conveyed by the rules in this case. But let's think of this from a different angle; could a PC make it possible for another PC to take the Attack action by pointing and shouting out the position of something? Not if it has Total Cover. Could it if the Attacking PC was Blinded? Yes, granted the Helping PC is within 5 feet of the target, because the Attacking PC is able to perform the Attack to begin with. The Disadvantage and Advantage would then cancel out.

Or, if Astre, or some other PC with the ability to see Invisibility, were to direct someone to Attack it, would I allow it? Possibly. Would PCs be uncomfortable with enemies having this ability?

But it makes sense from a logical point of view. Mallory is capable of blindly throwing her spell, and Astre's directions would definitely be of help. But ultimately, I would say it would enable an otherwise disallowed Action. I would definitely grant her Disadvantage on the Attack, and I would downgrade the Total Cover to Three-Quarters Cover (granted there is a route the spell can take to reach the unseen target) as it is still obscured by an obstacle. If Mallory were to close her eyes and rely on Astre to attack a target behind Three-Quarters Cover (she could see it to begin with), the target would still have Three-Quarters Cover. Otherwise, could Mallory not just decide that any amount of Cover doesn't matter, and instead choose to Attack with Disadvantage?


Rooftops


Yes, yes, true. Although I've contemplated this a bit, and I'm leaning towards requiring an Acrobatics check to successfully climb onto the roof. These are houses in a northern town, and the roofs are angled sharply to avoid the build-up of snow. This has previously been established, so I feel okay with this as it doesn't come out of left field. Good job, past version of myself!


Let's set the DC to 12 immediately. Not too difficult. It would make sense that there would be handholds for the residents to access if they had to reach the chimney to clean out soot. I maintain that it costs half your movement to climb atop the roof.

---

I feel myself getting sleepy :S . Hopefully I didn't make too many errors. Since this turned rather long, I'll summarize;

The Troll in question has Two-Thirds Cover (which means Mallory has vision of it). Astre can swoop in to provide her Advantage without suffering any consequences, but the Troll would still benefit from Two-Thirds Cover.
This message was last edited by the GM at 00:02, Fri 11 June 2021.

Produce Flame Range vs. Fire Bolt Range
No argument, but just a difference of interpretation.  "Produce Flame" has an attack range of 30', which is within a character's natural capacity to throw an item (20/60 feet).  "Fire Bolt" has a range of 120', which is well beyond what a character can manage without the aid of a projectile weapon to do the work for them.  My interpretation of the difference is that "Fire Bolt" must have some form of extra propulsion that allows it to fly that far while "Produce Flame" is hurled entirely by the strength of one's arm.  "Fire Bolt" flies faster/further and hits harder, so it literally has more "firepower" behind it.  ^^;  Though I do concede that there's no reason "Fire Bolt" couldn't also have a drop-off trajectory arc as well that the caster accounts for when shooting for its further ranges.

Proximity in Combat to use the Help Action
I would argue this one particularly because of how narrow its base presentation is.  It ends up being a case of Rules as Written vs. Rules as Intended.  By RAW, an assisting creature has to be within 5' of the target because it's phrased in a manner that expresses direct interference.  "You feint, distract the target, or in some other way team up to make your ally’s Attack more effective."  This is fine in a brawl, but it doesn't account for range at all.  With the proposed action of Astre helping Mallory aim because he has a higher vantage point to view the battlefield from being the reason he can offer the Help Action?  He's not attempting to distract the Troll, he's attempting to be Mallory's spotter.  It doesn't make any reasonable sense to me that he'd have to divebomb down into melee range with a Troll, hover there while Mallory takes her attack, and then fly away at the start of his next turn.

Consider a sniper and spotter.  One character is manning a mounted crossbow and wants to strike a far-off target that would be in the weapon's secondary range bracket, thus at Disadvantage to the attack roll.  But at his side there's another character with a spyglass to scope out the target and give the person directions to improve their shot.  By common sense applications, that's absolutely a Help Action despite neither of the two being anywhere near the target.

A similar argument could be made for the assisting character throwing something from across a room, or using a non-damaging spell as a distraction.  For example, what if Farwalker is brawling with someone and Mallory uses "Prestidigitation" from ten feet away to toss up a sudden flare of sparks in the enemy's face to distract them?  Or even just a mundane action, like pelting them in the eyes with a bunch of snow?  Neither inflict any status condition like Blinded or Stunned, nor can they deal damage, but surely each would qualify as a distraction for a Help action?

Climbing Variables


Might be a difference in ruling, but I'd personally make this a binary choice.  If there's a given structure to aid in climbing (a rope, handholds, etc) then that should normally negate the need for a Climb check.  Climbing (if you don't have a Climb Speed) already costs extra movement to begin with because of the difficulty of vertical movement.  Terrain that's designed to facilitate climbing (such as stairs, ramps, and I'd argue ladders) wouldn't necessarily yield the same slow-down in their traversal.  If the buildings specifically have steps and handholds built into them for the sake of being climbed on the regular by townsfolk, that seems to me like it would negate the need for a speed reduction as well.

My personal take would be that using the built-in ladders doesn't cost extra movement, but does require an Athletics/Acrobatics skill check because of the slippery, icy conditions if the climber wants to move at full speed.  If they want to avoid they skill check (and thus the risk of falling on their ass), they move at half speed.  If the character wants to just try and parkour their way up without any assistance of built-in handholds at all, then it's both half speed and a skill check.

Fire Bolt and the Added Range
I definitely see your point. What if you cast Fire Bolt at 30 feet? Could you intentionally give it less oomph (an underhanded as opposed to an overhanded throw), thus making it behave similarly to Produce Flame? The world may never know . . .

Help Action Only Within 5 Feet
I agree, which is why I argued for the fact that it made logical sense for Astre to be able to help her from afar, whether it be relying on the mechanics of the Help Action or introducing something new. But following rules as written, the Help Action is only within 5 feet. I would also disagree slightly with you on this not being intended design. If I were to guess, this was a very deliberate design choice meant to limit the strength of the Help Action. If everyone could go around chucking Advantage at each other, I think we would see the Help Action be used a lot more.

But I would be fine with that! It's currently a very underused mechanic, and one of the more obscure Actions that require a higher degree of knowledge of the game system to utilize. Incentivizing it further could be a net benefit.

The only reason why I didn't feel inclined to change it or argue it further is because Astre would literally suffer no downside to just temporarily position himself within 5 feet of the Troll. Correct me if I'm wrong, but he has 60' of flying speed, so he could easily swoop in, hover so Mallory can cast the spell, and have plenty of movement left over to complete the round trip. So if we could have that happen, I didn't feel any reason to deviate from RAW.

Or we could scratch it entirely, as its just an extra hoop to jump through. Depends on what you think, honestly. If you think its out of character for Astre, or unfun to write, then we'll alter the rule instead so you don't have to alter your post to fit the rule.

An amendment to the Help Action to reflect our changes will appear in the Rules thread later today.

Checks and Rules on Climbing
It would definitely still be tough terrain. I imagine Mallory trying to use the handholds to reach the top, and it would be a much slower process than if she were to cover the same distance on flat, unhindered ground. Here's my reasoning for requiring a Check in addition to imposing movement restrictions:

1. The roofs are angled very sharply.
2. There are not handholds on every surface on the roof. There would only be a single line of access that travels from the eaves to the chimney. These lines of handholds are not indicated on the map in any way. If a character were to refrain from using the handholds in order to access a different part of the roof without handholds, how would that factor in? I would say with a Check.

However, a Dexterity Save would more accurately simulate reality, and it would occur when your character wished to move. On a fail, the character would slide down in a straight line and either land on their feet on ground level, or fall prone. We'd have to introduce another Check or define multiple levels of success.

I would then have to draw the handholds on the map. It could be fun, as it adds another layer of restriction and interaction. Though it would be purely restrictive compared to not requiring a Check at all, and just imposing Tough Terrain. The double movement to access the roof in the first place comes from the fact that accessing these handholds is not as simple as just climbing a ladder; your character would have to cross the vertical gaps that allows them to access the roof in the first place. Since the roofs are so sharply slanted (imagine how such a building would look; the roof's eaves would be much closer to the ground), I would say it is possible to do this from ground level.

The Dexterity Save is more punishing than an Acrobatics Check, even if we would lower the DC to 10, as it would occur on every turn as opposed to being a one-time thing you roll for. I'm then left wondering why in the world anyone would attempt to climb onto the roof if its just a matter of time before they slide down . . .

For this reason, and since we're so far into the combat already, I'm going to scratch it. We'll rely on double movement and Tough Terrain, as was the original plan.
This message was last edited by the GM at 09:23, Fri 11 June 2021.

Intentionally Depowering Spells
That's actually a house rule I use in order to give spellcasters a little more capability in combat.  In my own games, I allow certain attack cantrips to be cast as non-lethal damage, on the idea that 1) Cantrips are spells casters know almost reflexively and some grow stronger as the caster levels, indicating that they're malleable in the first place, and 2) It makes a measure of sense to me that a caster should be able to pull their punches if they so chose.

The catch is that only certain cantrips qualify.  It has to use an Attack Roll, and Cantrips that deal Fire, Acid, Radiant, or Necrotic Damage cannot be dialed back (burning and rotting isn't something you can really pull the reigns on, after all).  That leaves us with "Booming Blade", "Eldritch Blast", "Magic Stone", "Primal Savagery", "Ray of Frost", "Shillelagh", "Shocking Grasp", and "Thorn Whip".  Dropping them down in power doesn't reduce their damage output, but does allow the player to specify that they want to just knock out an enemy dropped to 0 HP rather than kill them, same as with standard melee.

Ranged Help and Astre Within 5'

Difference of opinion, but I saw it less as a deliberate effort to curtail the Help Action's use and more just an oversight that could use some Errata attention by this point.  It's not like players remember half the stuff they can do in a turn anyway either; practically everyone forgets they can all Dodge and Disengage as an Action.  ^^;  That said, if we were to houseful Ranged Help in, I'd personally lean more toward it requiring stricter justifications in the moment; the player would have to give a solid reason as to why what they're doing is genuinely of assistance.  Such as Astre being eyes-in-the-sky, for instance.  His present overhead view and connection as a Familiar to communicate telepathically is more useful to Mallory than someone else in the party just yelling "hey, try aiming this way!", which I'd say wouldn't work as Help in most cases.



40' Fly Speed, and I previously set Astre as being at least 60' above the fight to keep him well out of harm's reach, so he's very much unable to dive down within 5' this round.  He could Dash, but that would just be suicide since it would leave him both within the Cold Aura and unable to use his Action to Help.  So if Astre can Help at range, we're good to go.  If he can't, then he's just going to remain up where he is and not do anything risky.

That said, this all is a bit moot since it doesn't change that the Troll has 3/4ths cover.  In this case it's less about whether she can see the target and more her chances of actually being able to toss her spell accurately.  Her attack roll would be unchanged even if Mallory climbed up onto the roof since the building still obscures the majority of the Troll and she doesn't have the necessary movement speed to get into a more opportune position on ground-level.  So I'm left having to leave it up to luck, which is on theme for Mallory  :3
This message was last edited by the player at 10:15, Fri 11 June 2021.

This has to be a quick response. I can address your other points in a subsequent post.

Astre can give Mallory Advantage by using the Help Action, even if he’s at range. I’ll write a more formalized rule later on.

EDIT: And I realize now that even if Astre could swoop down to within 5' of the Troll he would of course end up taking an Attack of Opportunity if he exited the range - the Troll could swat it out of the air. It wouldn't be 'free of charge', as I earlier assumed.
This message was last edited by the GM at 20:08, Fri 11 June 2021.

Allowance of Non-Lethal Spells
Seems in line with the ruling regarding non-lethal attacks, and it's surely something that can come up in a game. Good thinking!

Ranged Help
As you can see in the Rules thread, I decided to just scratch out the 5 feet requisite from the thread. And if you are right in that it's just an oversight as opposed to an intentional design choice, it might still be an intentional one, as weeding out any additional criteria for what should and shouldn't be allowed as ranged help could get tedious very quickly and bloat the description. 'Brevity over accuracy'.

I ran into the same problem when thinking about it, and ultimately just ended up scratching out the requirement and leaving the rest as is. The clause that follows is one that leaves interpretation and enactment in the hands of the DM anyway. But from this wording, you should always be allowed to perform Help at range, as long as it is justified in some way. That justification doesn't necessarily have to be perfect, or even good, but the player (and DM) has to think about what the character does to provide the Help.

And the reason Help is underutilized is both because players often don't know they can do it, and because it's not exactly fun to relegate your character to a 'Help' bot, even if it is strictly advantageous. I suspect, even amid this party, we won't see a significant increase in use. With the exception of Astre, of course.

Hmm. Maybe I should add a stipulation so Astre doesn't become a help bot. As long as it's outdoors combat, I don't know why Mallory wouldn't just have Astre give her Advantage on every single Spell Attack from this point forth. It's not like there's much else for him to do, since he can't Attack on his own. And granting Advantage is a fairly powerful ability. You know what, I'm somewhat unsure if I don't regret this. I'll mull it over and arrive at a decision, but I might end up retracting the amendment, or at the very least reformat it to avoid this specific exploitation.

Ranged Advantage Conditions
There's a few ways to add in qualifiers for giving Help at range.  The simplest is to put a distance restriction.  For example, the basic throwing range all characters have is 20', while all standard player character races have a a movement speed of at least 25' with the majority being 30'.  It would be reasonable, in that case, for one to determine that a character must be within 20' of the target to be able to yield Help at range, as that's the maximum range the majority of creatures could readily approach and influence if they want to get physically involved.  An exception could be offered for non-damaging Cantrips or widespread mundane events that have a greater range of effect, but that would be a case-by-case situation at the DM's discretion.

For cases where the assistance granted is purely passive, such as with Astre, the range might be limited to the character's line/distance of sight and range at which one can communicate.  That's usually 30'-60' depending on lighting and weather conditions for most creatures, albeit Familiars are better at the communication bit since they have 100' telepathy.

Another condition can be similar to Sneak Attack's functionality, in that Help can't be granted if the person attempting it would have Disadvantage themselves.  For example, if both characters are in a dense fog cloud and can't see, it wouldn't make sense for them to be able to grant each other Help and flatten their rolls.

One more extreme option would be to alter the action economy somewhat, in saying that using Help at range requires the character to use both their Action and Reaction in order to do so, thus making it a more strategic effort requiring more of the helper's energy and preventing them from splitting their attention.

Familiar Familiarity
That is the case barring any additional limitations we apply, but Mallory could very well just re-cast "Find Familiar" to turn Astre into an Owl and get a free auto-Help Bot every round 100% within RAW already.  That would be the more economical way to do it and is the standard meta since Owls get "fly-by attack" and can freely avoid Opportunity Attacks as they please.  Astre (and all other Familiars besides Owls, really) are at a disadvantage in that particular case and this would basically be leveling the playing field with Owls.


The same reason why I had Mallory hide behind a corner and ramp up a very low AC target to a very high AC target, for functionally no reason.  Narrative.  :3  While I strive for as much universal application with rules as possible, one does have to take the individual group and players one is with when it comes to house rules.  One can assume a rule won't be abused on the notion that the players they have presently aren't the type to abuse rules.  Highly subjective, of course, but still a factor.

It's also conditional on the situation one is in.  Astre playing spotter to help give Mallory a better angle of attack when she's got obscuring terrain and his vantage point grants insight?  Viable for Help.  Mallory squared up toe-to-toe with an enemy where she can already see everything herself?  Not so much.  Astre being at range and able to offer a different observation on the view wouldn't be of any use in that case and thus couldn't reasonably grant Advantage.  At that point it would be reasonable for Astre to have to resort to physical interference, which would require him to move into melee since he doesn't have the appendages necessary to throw something.
This message was last edited by the player at 19:51, Sat 12 June 2021.

Trade-offs
In game design, reward should have, or be predicated, by trade-offs. In the case of normal PCs, that trade-off comes in the form of giving up your Attack, or whatever else your character might have used its Action for, to perform the Help Action. This is different in Astre's case, as he normally doesn't have anything to expend his Action on (you could say you forego doing Perception Checks, or Dodge, or Dash, or Hide, but which would you rather have? A continuous stream of any of those, or a continuous stream of Advantage on your Spellcasting?). Astre's Action is not a resource in demand. Often, it goes unused. There is no trade-off or potential of trade-off to reap a reward. It doesn't matter how much we extend the range; the trade-off inherent to the rules-as-written is that he would provoke an Attack of Opportunity.

Now, you could have him changed to an owl, sure. But owls do not have Detect Invisibility or Poison Sense. Additionally, they have a lower AC, fewer Hit Points, and an Intelligence of 2 as opposed to 10 (they do have Keen Hearing, which is a point in their favor). So I wouldn't think of it leveling the playing field; the playing field is already even. A Tressym is already not a viable RAW option for a Familiar, so I am hesitant to tack on something that would constitute a Flyby ability on top of that. As a DM, I have to consider party balance in addition to the 'fun' element; at the end of the day, playing favorites can lead to grievances. And I have a tendency to say yes to those who ask, and then not perform the balancing act immediately, which causes it to fall wayside.

And if anything, the Flyby ability is further proof that I suspect limiting the Help Action to melee was an intentional design choice.

Additional Qualifiers
While what you propose are good points and certainly helps us get closer to a solution, I do take a few issues with some of them.

1. Limit the range: The extent of the range isn't necessarily the problem, it is the preliminary jump from 5' to more than 5'. Barring enemies with the Polearm Master feat, he would still be able to ignore any risk of Attacks of Opportunity, which, in this design instance, is the trade-off.
   
   
2. Can't Help if the benefactor has Disadvantage: Interesting. In this specific instance, Mallory did not have Disadvantage, so it wouldn't necessarily change anything. But it would be an additional qualifier that follows logically. However, it only half-solves our problem, as it serves to limit its usage, but doesn't impose a trade-off when it's still applicable. Therefor, I would argue the limitation has to be more severe.
   
   
3. Using a Reaction in addition to an Attack: Our problem is specific to the usage of this new variant of the Help Action by a familiar conjured by Find Familiar. They are severely limited in using their Reaction as well, as, when interpreting the description in good faith, should say they can't Ready an Attack. That would be kind of silly. So giving up both for Astre isn't a big sacrifice (in most cases; I'm sure there are scenarios where it would be beneficial for him to Ready an Action that is not the Attack Action).

Of these three, I think the #2 is best fitting of our purpose. Maybe it could work if we tuned it to apply more frequently.

Players Applying the Rules Sparsely
While I trust you wholeheartedly not to abuse it, this is ultimately not within my realms of control (if push comes to shove, I can yell at you in the OOC "NOOOO MALLORY! YOU USED THE HELP ACTION LAST TURN YOU CAN'T USE IT AGAIN!" ლ(ಠ益ಠლ) ). I also wish the rule to apply to everyone, not just you. If William the Warlock joined, I don't want William to point and go "Hey, that's pretty strong. I want to do that every turn!" And what ultimately constitutes 'abuse' is subjective; your idea of what is over the line might be different from mine or William the Warlock's. Plus, I think it's a fun exercise to see if we can come up with something clever! :)

So I think we should settle on a qualifier that makes sense, or I have to be a mean DM and ask you to suck it up >:)

Brainstorming Alternative Restrictions or Trade-offs
It comes down to this; we either have to limit the cases in which the Help Action can be taken at Range, or we have to introduce some Trade-offs that do not involve getting within melee range and provoking an Attack of Opportunity. To better wrap my head around it, I want to first boil down to how it makes logical sense for Astre to be able to grant Mallory Advantage through the Help Action in this instance. Then we can perhaps backwards engineer a stipulation to cover this scenario and any similar ones.

1. Mallory does not have full vision of the Troll. She has partial vision of the Troll because it has Half Cover. Did I say Two-Thirds earlier? I think I did. I'm getting my fractions jumbled; while writing the original response I started referring to it as 'Three-Thirds' Cover and only caught myself in the last moments before clicking 'Post Message' (come on, get a goddamn grip, brain!). Anyway, I meant Half Cover.  The other (southernmost) Troll has Two-Thirds Cover.
   
   
2. Astre can grant Mallory Advantage because he can (telepathically) communicate some information to Mallory that she otherwise would not have had access to. From my understanding, the in-universe reason is that this information pertains to the location/movement of the Troll. As Mallory would know where it is because she can see its head (or parts of its head) and possesses object permanence, I would figure its more in relation to its movement and behavior as opposed to just its current whereabouts.

In case it becomes relevant, I want to put it into more generalized words as well: Astre is able to provide Mallory the full picture of a given situation.

So Let's Get To It . . .
What if we impose a penalty to Astre? Astre has one valuable resource; Movement. And there is no real precedent for an Action to force the user to cut its speed or stand still to use it. It is also somewhat messy. (Astre has to hover in the air or land to communicate this information? Nah, that doesn't make much sense to me).

What if Astre can only use the Help Advantage at Range if he can offer Mallory some new information from his vantage point? (" . . . alternatively, a player can perform the Help Action at range to provide Advantage on an Ability Check or Saving Throw if they can provide additional information on the target?") If this was to be formalized, it doesn't account for your examples of using Prestidigitation at Range to temporarily distract the target. We also run into the problem of quantifying 'additional' information. "The monster is wearing blue shoes" doesn't really strike me as information that can help Mallory in any significant way . . .

What if it relates to Cover instead? If the target of Mallory's Attack has two-thirds Cover, Astre can grant Advantage to the roll if he has full visibility of the target. This would be a very, very Mallory-and-Astre specific rule that would seldom crop up in other scenarios. And in more tight spaces, it forces Mallory to have to maneuver Astre into favorable positions, which might consequently expose him to threats more. It would also not be applicable in every instance. And it loops back around to my earlier point about how Full Cover could be downgraded to Two-Thirds Cover, or enable Mallory to Attack it outright if her Spell has a clear trajectory. This would also apply to invisible people, since Astre is able to see them, but not Mallory. Astre could then negate Mallory's disadvantage. Oh boy . . . such an amendment would be lengthy, and involves a bunch of different mechanics that come together. It wouldn't be elegant in the slightest.

We could perhaps generelize it further to make use of the 'visibility' aspect, and drop the Cover part.

Ranged Help: If you have full vision of a target, you can pass information about the target's positioning and behavior to an ally who has partial or no vision of the same target. The next Attack your ally makes against the target has Advantage.

---

EDIT: Something seems to have slipped my mind. The rule should cover Prestidigitation and similar cantrips/spells that can distract the target at range. This can be solved by tacking something on. We're approaching 'inelegant' territory, but I can't think of any unifications that make sense.

Ranged Help: You distract the target with the use of a cantrip or spell that is otherwise harmless. Alternatively, if you have full vision of a target, you can pass information about the target's position and behavior to an ally who has partial or no vision of the same target. The next Attack your ally makes against the target has Advantage.
This message was last edited by the GM at 09:01, Sun 13 June 2021.

The last version I posted of the rule has been implemented.

No sleep, unfortunately. While targeting is not an issue as there's a clear, open space for the 20 area to be positioned behind the Troll without affecting allies, after taking damaging from Moyrah, Mallory, and Rhydd, the Troll is at 28 HP (61 - 6 - 8 - 19 = 28). A roll of 24 (which is also bang on the average) is not enough. In this scenario, my advice would have been to upcast it, as it allows you to roll an additional 2d8. But I am unsure if I am going to retroactively allow you to alter that decision. That should be determined before the dice are rolled, as otherwise you could go "I'll attempt to cast it with a 1st level slot, and if that doesn't work I'll up it to a 2nd level slot". Which, as I think we can all agree, is not how it should work.

That being said, go ahead and upcast it on the premise that my leniency won't be abused. It'll make a for a cool moment. Consider this the only time I allow anyone (who's gotten this spiel) to retroactively change their spellslot.
This message had punctuation tweaked by the GM at 09:04, Thu 24 June 2021.

Regarding this particular case; you're forgetting to factor in Farwalker's own damage dealt on her Bonus Action.  It's listed in the turn order summary before her spell, and logically would trigger first - it would make no sense for Farwalker to attempt to put the enemy to sleep only to immediately wail on it and wake it up, thus wasting her own spell.

The total damage dealt over the rounds, including Farwalker's:

Troll Current HP: 61
Moyrah: 6 (Throwing Axe)
Mallory: 8 (Produce Flame Spell)
Rhydd: 19 (Longbow w/Action Surge)
Farwalker: 8 (Spiritual Weapon)

Remaining Troll HP: 20

That puts the Troll well under the rolled 24 Sleep value, and thus out cold and vulnerable for Torgrim to finish off with an auto-crit sneak attack if he moves up into melee range.
This message was last edited by the player at 09:14, Thu 24 June 2021.

Oh, you're entirely correct! My bad.

Scratch everything.

Regarding the Imminent Level-Up
I've been contemplating giving you both a Feat and the Ability Score Improvement. Normally you would have to pick one or the other. Waaay earlier, while we were just setting up the game, one of you brought up how the official ruleset is very stingy when it comes to handing out Feats (you either have to forego the ASI, or be a Variant Human to access them). Which is a shame, since they provide great opportunities to flesh out your characters' identities. Preferably, I would have given you the free Feat at character creation, but that fell wayside, so the second best option is to do it now.

However, we have two hurdles to jump:

1. It is possible to achieve a +3 to a single stat if you pick the right Feat. This is subjective, admittedly, but that jump is too big for my taste. Say a Fighter chooses to increase their Strength, which currently is at 15 and +2 to hit, to an 18, which would grant a +4 to hit. It feels like we're skipping ahead a bit much, doesn't it? How do we reconcile that development with the narrative? Furthermore, this will serve to skew the difficulty level of future encounters significantly. So either we would have to tune the ASI down to +1, or we have to put a cap of +2 points to a single Ability Score. So if you allot +2 in Strength, then pick Heavy Armor Master, which increases your Strength by another point, you would not benefit from the Strength increase (which means you should do +1 to Strength and +1 to another Ability Score, then pick Heavy Armor Master).
   
   
2. Rogues and Fighters get more ASI as they climb in levels, and therefor the option to pick more Feats than the other classes. So we encounter somewhat of a balance issue if we were to use this rule for every ASI, as Fighters and Rogues could leap ahead. The solution would be to grant you both only for the ASI that are shared across all classes (levels 4, 8, 12, 16, and 19), or for this level-up only.

I'm curious what your thoughts on this are. If you think it's unnecessary, we won't do it. Reply below if you have an opinion!
This message was last edited by the GM at 14:34, Tue 03 Aug 2021.

I've already chatted a bit about this topic via PM, but it's worthwhile to chime in on and consolidate thoughts for open discussion.

Given the rate of ASIs based on class; I believe that's simply a balancing effort given the needs of the classes in question.  Fighters, for example, need to spread their stats across two or three stats (STR and/or DEX, CON, and whatever support stat suits their subclass) to maximize their effectiveness.  Additionally, the majority of Feats are combat-related and a Fighter specializing in a given route needs to invest heavily into that.  I'd actually say the Barbarian class is the best "base example" to work from, as it only requires a two-stat investment (STR and CON), only needs one or two Feats to be outstandingly effective in a given route, and has the same basic shared ASI distribution across all classes.  Fighters are a comparatively more technical class to manage.

The point being: I don't think a potential (not guaranteed) +3 stat jump at a single level up is particularly troublesome at all when looking at the big picture of what that actually contributes to a character's effectiveness.  In your given example, let's look at what the Fighter in question actually gains.

Level 3 Fighter -> Level 4 Fighter
STR either goes from 15/+2 to 16/+3 or 18/+4
Barring any Subclass features (as those are too variable to account for here), the only thing that happens is the Fighter's STR-related Skills, STR Saving Throw, and Attack/Damage rolls increase from +3 to +4.  It's not as if they're suddenly doubling their overall might; it's frankly a rather minor boost in and of itself, even when paired with the additional effects granted by a given Feat.  The Fighter is basically just slightly increasing their chance to hit and adding on 1 additional point of damage per attack.  It all adds up in the long run, sure, but right now it doesn't make a huge difference; certainly not to the degree that it would need some kind of narrative justification either.

The impact of this sort of increase varies a lot more depending on which stat you select (DEX clearly has a far broader reach, while casting stats have a greater overall effect for casters than STR does for melee).  But even that depends on their individual build as well.  For instance, given my current selection for Mallory's Feat choice not granting a stat boost of its own; if she got a +2 INT boost as well, that would push her up to 18/+4 INT, which functionally improves Spell Attack/DC and INT skills/Saving Throw by +1 and grants her one additional prepared spell, but does not grant her any new spells or spell slots.  Useful?  Absolutely.  Balance breaking?  Hardly.

---

When it all comes down to it, I think giving a +2 ASI in addition to what's offered by the Feat is a good choice.  It's not a game breaking power jump and it allows greater access to Feats, which are fun and flavorful.  It's a shame to risk locking them away and having a player forced to decide if they want a really interesting facet for their character versus being marginally more effective with their dice.

All good thoughts! Though it seems we differ slightly in opinion here. I'll try to argue my case.

First off, I think an extra +1 to hit is a bigger deal than your post makes it out to be. The fact that the designers thought a +2 to an Ability Score and the choice of a Feat to be on par with each other speaks to the power of increasing a stat. I don't think this is no mere oversight. With a +1 you will hit on an extra 5% of your attacks on average. A +2 to hit is an extra 10%. And on top of that we have damage, Skills, and Saving Throws to factor into the equation.

If your characters are stronger than their level would indicate, it could make encounter design more challenging on my end. I would have to account for that and adjust upward. Not a huge problem, as it can be worked around, but perhaps it counts for something?

In the example of the difference between +2 and +4, then yes, they would technically be doubling their might. But I'll concede that it would not be a good way to frame it.

It's not game-breaking, perhaps, but it definitely puts your characters ahead of the curve, and upsets the equilibrium between offense vs. defense. Granted you don't boost your CON, which is only one of six stats, your characters are more prone to becoming glass cannons. They're stronger, but at an earlier level where they have less HP, and will face tougher opponents. This is all assuming you build your characters somewhat intelligently, that is. We don't need to concern ourselves with the Wizard that wants to put all their points in Strength, or the Barbarian going a Dex build.

Unless you're playing as a Champion, your point about Fighters stand. The class often rely on Intelligence as either a pseudo-spellcasting ability, or for other mechanics like Superiority Dice. It is reasonable that their stats increase more often. However;

In relation to the other classes, which will get exactly what their table suggests they'll get unless with tinker with that too, the Fighter gets stronger level-ups if we operate on the assumption that the core rules are balanced.

I'm less concerned about narration, as we handwave a lot of this stuff anyway. Often there is no good explanation for why your character wakes up the next morning knowing that 3rd level spell — they just do. I think the topic of balance is more important.

But this is all moot anyway; I think restricting the amount you can bump a single stat to 2 points is the best option. It encourages versatility, as some of your characters might be forced to spec in a secondary or tertiary Stat. I think this makes for more well-rounded builds, and instead of narrowing down the array of Feats to pick from, you have access to everything, plus you get to make another choice of where to put that +1. It encourages some thinking. And there is some precedent for putting a ceiling on it if we think back to Races — no Race ever increases an Ability Score by 3 points, it's always either 1 or 2.
This message was last edited by the GM at 21:32, Tue 03 Aug 2021.

I've given it some thought, and I'm going to stop you right there. Firstly, I think this is a stretch of the official rulings, and it does wrap back to Mallory's reenactment of Astre's chase (though this particular case could easily be explained by having the visuals be aproximate as opposed to exact. Yes, I know you described it as being exact. We should avoid that in the future).


Why would Mallory ever bother with this part of the spell if Astre can just communicate the exact information? We've discussed this prior in PMs, though I'm not fully sure what we settled on. For now, narratively, we need to tone the communication back to something less detailed and leave it to more sweeping generalizations.

Writing something Astre sees seems to not be permitted by the spell, unless she's writing blindly. And then she'd end up with a jangled mess.

Now, what if Astre could merely read her the words? Sure, it would work then. He's a Tressym with an Int of 11 (does this mean he can read? I know he can understand spoken language, but I can't locate the information that mentions this detail). However, this is a cipher (of an undetermined nature) , not necessarily something Astre can communicate in a quick glance. And even if he could, it's still a stretch and I'd rather not permit it for the aforementioned reasons.

Secondly, if I were to permit this, it is established Astre had to struggle for a vantage point.


This has to do with the layout of the room, which I am free to establish, and so I did. At the very least, copying and deciphering Naerth's message would entail a Perception check from Astre (possibly at Disadvantage based on narration), followed by a pure Dex check, which she could have applied her proficiency for if she had it in Forgery Kits), and then finally a pure Int check, which she also could have applied her proficiency for if she had in Forgery Kits. Every part of this sequence would have to succeed, and even then I would possibly impose Disadvantage on the final Int check, because she's only left with parts of the message. Perhaps this decision could ultimately be decided on Astre's Perception check, but if I established he only catches glimpses of it without giving him the opportunity to roll, then so I have.

Good idea, though, albeit it a bit farfetched.

I had a look back at the writing, and you do specify that she extends her sight. My apologies, I misread that part. We'd go ahead with the rolls in that case, but the points on illusory reenactment still stands.
This message was last edited by the GM at 22:05, Thu 19 Aug 2021.

I did admittedly gloss past details just for the sake of keeping things moving, as we've delayed a lot on just Mallory/Astre.  To go into greater detail on my thought process for the situation at hand:

Familiar Telepathy vs. Shared Senses
Based on how non-linguistic Telepathic Communication works in 5e, Astre is sharing what he experiences after the fact, which includes sights, sounds, and sensory experiences.  The primary differences are:

1) There's a delay
Information shared in this manner is given after the fact, as the Familiar has to relay the information to the Wizard.  Sharing Senses, meanwhile is done in real-time.

2) Information gained is limited by the Familiar's awareness
The majority of Familiars aren't as intelligent as a Tressym or Imp.  Those two in particular make exceptional scouts because they're smart and perceptive.  Other more common Familiar animals aren't as attentive to details based entirely on their mental stats.  So while a Caster could rely entirely on their Familiar reporting what it witnesses via Telepathy after the fact, it might leave major gaps because the Familiar simply wasn't smart enough to understand what it was seeing.

It's sort of like watching security camera footage; the viewer is stuck with whatever is captured on screen.  But when a Familiar is within 100' for direct Sense Sharing, it's also within range to receive active commands from the Wizard for what to look at.  More like taking control of said camera to focus and zoom on specific things actively.  After the fact was fine for the sake of Astre's "eyes in the sky" tracking; he was mentioned as taking his time, so the assumption on my part was that he took in enough of a view of the surroundings that Mallory could reasonably replicate them with an Illusion spell.  It wasn't intended to be an exact duplication of what Astre saw from his aerial perspective; I basically intended it be like Mallory produced a single still image of a given building after having seen it from multiple different live angles from Astre's Telepathy.  Exact enough to potentially strike Naerth to believe her claims of extra-sensory awareness, while any flaws or missed details Mallory could try to dismiss as a lack of clarity in her visions.

Familiar Language Comprehension
Astre can read, yes.  When a creature is listed as having a given language, it's treated under the standard fluency rules (that it can speak, read, and write that language coherently) unless there are specific restrictions listed.  Tressym are fluent in Common but specifically cannot speak (presumably they lack the natural anatomy to verbalize in Common without the aid of magic spells to bridge the gap).  But Astre should be perfectly capable of reading and writing; we did already have him reading Dannika's notes while he was sat in her lap earlier, and reading the note Arkemos left behind, after all.

Writing Blind
Astre is smart enough to be able to read Common, but once he'd have reported that Naerth was writing either in a language/script he couldn't read, or was writing in Common with phrasing that didn't make any sense, Mallory would pop her vision over to see for herself.  You mentioned that it was a cipher in narrative so I took that as meaning the writing was immediately recognizable as being coded, rather than just being an innocent looking letter with double-meanings woven throughout.

As for the act of accurately writing blind... I mean, there's always a skill check if you'd like, but it's not like writing without looking at the paper is hard?  I do it all the time and, just to make sure, literally did it just now with my eyes shut.  My handwriting wasn't as precise as it would be had I kept my eyes open, but it was entirely legible and in-line.

Skill Check Breakdown
Astre's Vantage Point: Perception check
It's already confirmed in narration that Astre is in a position to at least partially read the letter being written, enough to recognize it's a cipher.  He can't risk moving around too much without potentially alerting Naerth of his presence, so a Perception check to see if he can make out details is perfectly reasonable.  A low roll would surely mean that he misses out on phrases he can't clearly get eyes on due to obstructions/bad angles.


Forgery Kits and the associated skill proficiency are used for creating "convincing forgeries of physical documents".  I'd already stated in the narration that Mallory is just copying down what she's able to see, not that she's trying to fashion an exact forgery duplicate of Naerth's handwriting.  I don't see how this would demand a Forgery skill check any more than someone taking notes of an eavesdropped conversation would.

INT check/Comprehend Languages Spell

This is why Mallory wanted to write down what she saw; Mallory needs to be able to touch the written document for the spell to work on it.  The spell states it doesn't reveal any secret messages in a text (ie, it can't decipher Thieves Cant because that's a contextual cipher hidden in otherwise known languages, but it could decipher Druidic because that's a "secret language" cipher unique to itself); if Naerth wrote in an outright code, Comprehend Languages might work.  If he wrote in couched language and innuendo that would only have meaning to a specific informed reader, Comprehend Languages wouldn't reveal anything out of the ordinary.

An accompanied INT check would also be reasonable on top of the spell, given that the range of just how much it can decipher is questionable.

All of that does rest entirely on Astre's Perception Check, however; missing parts of an encoded message would make manually deciphering it pretty much impossible.  At that point Mallory would have to rely on trying to show what she managed to copy to someone who knows ciphers in hopes they could offer partial clarity.

Familiar Telepathy
Mostly this related back to the strengths of the Tressym as a familiar, as you've stated. It's more intelligent and superior to the other options, so my main point was that we dial the visual communication back a notch for future descriptions. Going forward, for example, Mallory does not know the face of Herve's daughter — she's only able to produce a caricature based on the information Astre provides her. Same with Kaltro, who she's never actually seen. Astre would know his face, but Mallory can only try to piece it together.

I'm not sure we need to employ any check for this, however. It can mostly be solved through simple narration, and we'll have to be a bit more wary going forward so it doesn't spin out of control and provide Mallory with unreasonable advantages. Much of the fault lies on me as well, as I've certainly been more than eager to roll along with it at times :S

Familiar Comprehend Language
Yeah, you're right about this. I wasn't sure either way. Carry on.

Writing Blind
Sure, you're right on this one too. As long as we're talking about simple symbols we're familiar with, which we can see or envision clearly, but at what point does writing symbols border on drawing? On top of that, try to write blind as fast as you possibly can. She not only has to copy it, she has to write quicker than Naerth does, and he has a head start on her (plus she has to dip her pen!). If she writes too slow, he'll fold the letter and she'll end up with an incomplete copy. This isn't limited by Astre's ability to see it, so would warrant its own check.

Forgery Kits
As with artistic skills, 5e does not offer skills for every single thing a character may try to accomplish. The proficiency with the Forgery Kit was merely the closest approximation, and I think it's good enough to still utilize in the Int roll. What we're trying to simulate is a character general knowledge in cracking/writing cyphers, and this cuts close enough. If she knew Thieves' Cant, and the letter was written in Thieves' Cant, I'd say she just automatically succeeds, no need for a roll. It is far from unreasonable to assume that The Zhentarim would have their own coded language separate from The Cant, and not only that, the code would be amid the best in The Realm. They're arguably the thieves' organization after all.

To establish this, Naerth is writing in symbols. From my limited understanding on ciphertext and cryptanalysis it doesn't really matter to and from when it comes to complexity. Hell, even if he writes in symbols that doesn't rule out the possibility that there's a layer of innuendos and double-meaning beneath them, but Mallory can't possibly know that without cracking the key for the symbols first.

Which means I'll deem it impossible to decode the letter in the moment. You can roll for it if Mallory has downtime — she'll have to spend at least a long rest, or perhaps several days in between adventures to attempt to deduce the key, and even then it will be hard as hell, even if she did have the complete message. Turing didn't invent the general computer for the fun of it. (Hey, another apt allegory. Are you reading this, Rhydd?)

Do go ahead and roll Astre's Perception check and the Dex check, however, to see what Mallory has to work with.

Familiar Information Recall
I suppose at that point it would be a question of how good Astre's memory is.  I related things like physical appearances as being exact because Astre relayed the information to Mallory rather immediately; Kaltro only moments after seeing him, and the murder scene longer but after giving the entire room and its contents considerable scrutiny with his undivided attention.  It's reasonable that what he experienced would still be very clear in his mind at that point.  Same for things that Astre was transmitting to Mallory as he was still in Telepathy range, like the appearance of buildings and such.

Now relaying information to her days or longer after the fact, sure, that would absolutely come into question.  It's unlikely Astre or Mallory would be able to produce a mental and/or illusory image of Targos in the same amount of detail later this same week, for instance.  At least not without a skill check involved (INT?  WIS?  Not sure).  So far pretty much all the information Mallory's used via Astre's spying was rather immediate, but I can absolutely keep unreliable narration in mind for the future regarding longer delays or confusing circumstances Astre might encounter.

Writing Blind, At Speed
As Mallory is a Wizard and confirmed to have plenty of professional tutoring under other spellcasters who surely had little patience for slow students, I dare say she's qualified to take notes at high speed and accuracy.  Also, I mentioned in narration she's using a writing stylus (which is basically a medieval pencil - a bit of lead or charcoal housed in a wooden frame to varying degrees of ornateness), not ink and quill, so she has no need to pause.

I still hold to my disagreement on the matter of forgeries, as in 5e that's in regard to a precise action of imitation and duplication.  If it's just a case of Mallory trying to write accurately at speed without necessary concern for duplicating Naerth's handwriting, I'd personally set it as a Slight of Hand check instead since the focus of the action is more on swift and accurate dexterity.

Ciphers and Spellcasting

To point, that's what "Comprehend Languages" is for; it's the only spell in 5e that translates unknown languages, so it should be able to handle this.  If Mallory can get the entire message accurately copied down, the spell should be able to translate it for her.  If the cipher is double layered (encoded text and innuendo phrasing) then the spell would break the encoding to let her read what it literally states, but not provide any context for the innuendos.

If Mallory can't get all the information copied (bad angle on the Perception check, flawed transcription on the INT/DEX check) then the spell wouldn't work fully and then all the rest you mentioned kicks in as she'll have to do things manually with partial information.  Does that seem like a fair middle ground?

Familiar Telepathy
We're getting so granular on this that I think we've missed the plot, but I would say it's not only about how good Astre is at recalling things, but how he communicates these things to Mallory. If he can project an image directly into her head, such as one might think when one pictures something simple like a flower, or a book, then there is no need for tapping into Astre's senses, since he can just relay what he sees.

I would more so say that any imagery he conveys is far more abstract — if he says flower, Mallory won't know what specific kind of flower it is. Even then, I think we would be better off avoiding imagery and "snapshots" all together, limiting it to just words and spoken language. We've established Mallory can understand Astre-speak, so I would just say he signals "mrow meow mrow" and Mallory knows he's stalking Arkemos.

It won't have anything to do with the immediacy of the relay — the information will be an approximation no matter what.

The one reason we do this is so that we force Mallory to use the 'share senses' feature more. It would also serve to put the Familiar on a 100' leash. Like a normal Wizard with a normal familiar would have to. There's no reason to elevate the Tressym above and beyond the extra features it already gets. If I have to impose INT/WIS checks to enforce it, I will. Most likely I will have Astre, not Mallory, do these Skill checks to see how much information he can remember and can communicate to Mallory (i.e, which memorization techniques he utilizes and how adept he is at them). Sound fair?

Comprehend Languages


Yeah, I can't think of any reason why this wouldn't work. As you say, it'll work on Druidic, but not Thieves' Cant.

I can write a post detailing what she ends up with, but you'll have to give me a moment.

Concerning Handwriting and Cyphers, and Utilizing Tools instead of Skill Checks


I would personally reserve Sleight of Hand checks for subterfuge, as the description of the Skill specifies. I've run into this issue before, where we equate Sleight of Hand to the Dexterity of one's fingers/hands. Perhaps Forgery Kit isn't too accurate for this one — we could instead utilize the Calligrapher's Supplies. So if Mallory has proficiency in that, she can go ahead and add her Proficiency Bonus to the Dex roll.

Cyphers and encoding messages seem like a very natural extension of the properties of a Forgery Kit to me — as with forgery, it concerns craftiness with letters and documents. It's definitely more fitting than Sleight of Hand. Perhaps we could use Calligrapher's Supplies for this as well, but I don't think it any more fitting than the Forgery Kit. So Forgery Kit it is. We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.
This message was last edited by the GM at 18:55, Fri 20 Aug 2021.

Relevant Tool Kits/Proficiency

While it makes little difference for Mallory either way, as she lacks Proficiency or the necessary kits themselves for either, I would agree that Calligrapher's Supplies would fit in here or in similar future applications.

I wasn't getting much useful information from the DMG, so I checked Xanathar's Guide as it has an expanded list of things you can do with Tool Kits and examples of how they may be applied.  All of the various skill check examples used with a Forgery Kit (Arcana, Deception, Investigation, etc) explicitly focus on the creation or identification of a convincingly fake document, which is simply not the case here.  Calligrapher's Supplies are more about identifying and investigating writings, but it at least has something relevant in the "Decipher Treasure Map" function that permits a character to identify hidden messages contained in the map's details.  That's about as close to a code or cipher as either Tool description mentions.

I saw that, and read a post from someone utilizing Calligrapher's Supplies for the exact need we're trying to fill. However, I would say this is more just 'familiarity with inks and handwriting from different epochs'. It does specifically limit it to maps, which I find kind of strange, and it does mention "hidden messages", which can have a many interpretations. Overall, I think the designers just didn't give deciphering/encoding enough attention.

I stand by the fact that Forgery Kit is applicable. Calligrapher's Supplies more so pertains . . . calligraphy. If it weren't for the mention of maps, I would be perfectly happy relegating it to just analyzing handwriting in a stylistic fashion. It's something that could come up often enough too, though proficiency in Calligrapher's Supplies isn't all too common.

Forgery Kits contain all the supplies you need to write letters, just like Calligrapher's Supplies do, while being way more in line with cunning and misconduct. I find it thematically more fitting. And it's not about the tools anyhow, it's about the knowledge.

Now that I think about it, there's a lot of overlap between these two tools. Would I reasonably deny someone with proficiency in Forgery Kits from analyzing handwriting? No, it's a natural assumption to make that someone proficient in Forgery Kits is good at analyzing handwriting. They have to be, because otherwise how would they copy it? And vice versa — someone with a good understanding of calligraphy would be able to copy someone's handwriting. It leads me to think that we would be better off collapsing these two tools into one. It would serve to make the proficiency more lucrative as well.

I do certainly agree that some Tool Kits could stand to be consolidated.  There's a number which seem terribly redundant or not at all useful to take on their own outside of being part of a niche character design.  Cobbler's, Glassblower's, Potter's Tools, WoTC?  Really?

My general approach would be to combine various kits based on their overall theme as opposed to their precise contents.  Something like this:

Disguise Kit, Forgery Kit -> "Imposter's Kit"
Combine both kits into an all-in-one toolbox of items necessary for a character to pull off a convincing false identity, falsifying both appearance and documents.

Alchemist's Supplies, Brewer's Supplies, Herbalism Kit, Poisoner's Tools -> "Apothecary's Tools"
All of these tools have the same general function of identifying compounds, collecting ingredients that can be made into potables/medicine/potions/poisons, and then crafting them into such.

Calligraphy Supplies, Painter's Supplies -> "Historian's Tools"
Supplies for one who specializes in identifying, analyzing, and recreating writing, art, and historical documents.

Cobbler's Tools, Weaver's Tools, Leatherworker's Tools -> "Tailor's Tools"
All the tools necessary for the production, repair, and study of garments and light armor.

Meanwhile, various tool kits could simply be folded into a single greater tool kit.  For instance, such as folding Cartographer's Tools into Navigator's Tools, or folding Glassblower's/Jeweler's/Potter's Tools into the broader Tinker's Tools.
This message was last edited by the player at 21:12, Fri 20 Aug 2021.

Tools and Guilds
I think it's WotC's attempt to simulate medieval guilds in a fantasy world. And if it's part of the game, it should crop up in play, hence proficiency in all these niche supplies. It's not necessarily a bad idea, except some of these are so non-adventurous that they just end up being incredibly boring. No-one's sat down at the table to discuss the details of glassblowing or pottery, we're here to cast spells and stab goblins with swords. The issue is especially blatant since these specific tools are so overshadowed by the actually useful tools (looking at you, Thieves' Tools).

As you touch upon, it becomes more about providing alternatives for the players so they can cement their character's backstory, as opposed to being designed for actual play. And distilling them for usefulness might be well and swell, but I don't think we should lose track of this, because it does bring something valuable to the table. Namely more fleshed out characters.

I like many of your changes, though I have a couple of suggestions.

Since we're distilling these anyway down to fewer kits, if we could introduce Cryptographer's Tools in the "Imposter's Kit" I'd be happy.

Calligraphy Supplies, Painter's Supplies ➔ "Historian's Artist's Tools"
I think this communicates more effectively as to what skills the tool provides proficiency in. Historian's Tools is too all-encompassing and scholarly, and not necessarily what the player might look for if they wish to make an artistically inclined character.

Jeweler's Tools, Woodcarver's Tools, Potter's Tools, Mason's Tools, Glassblowing Tools ➔ "Crafter's Tools"
This'll be the "specialized" option where all those incredibly niche things can coexist. Somehow. You'd need to provide some flavortext for it, or perhaps a table with components to choose from so the player can customize their kit. I considered lumping Glassblowing Tools in with Smith's Tools, since both are utilized in a forge, but I'm not sure a smith and a glassblower share many similarities in skillset.

Navigator's Tools and Cartographer's Tools can just be collapsed into Navigator's Tools (or Cartographer's Tools, for that matter. I think you can pick either one). I agree wholeheartedly. A Navigator should have access to maps, and the know-how to draw them. And why in god's name would deciphering secret messages on treasure maps NOT BE ON EITHER OF THESE???.

Smith's Tools can stand on its own two legs. The fact that Clerics have an entire subclass dedicated to the concept is evidence enough for this.

Tinker's Tools is also fine, but I'd maybe rename it to "Repair Kit" or something. If anything, it's overshadowed by Mending. Or perhaps Tinkers' Tools can be dropped completely, and we'll say Crafter's Tools lets you repair and analyze stuff. It would hardly be gamebreaking.

Cook's Utensils is also fine on its own, albeit a bit weak. It doesn't really have any qualities that serves to unify it with another tool or kit.

I think that's all of them. In conclusions, this would probably require another few revisions before it could actually be implemented. As it stands, we'd end up with nine or ten tools/kits total, depending on the fate of Tinker's Tools. And I would dare say it's an improvement over the official nineteen.
This message was last edited by the GM at 23:39, Fri 20 Aug 2021.

Calligraphy Supplies, Painter's Supplies
I was honestly fumbling for a name on this one; I agree that Historian isn't ideal but I struggled to find anything more apt (Paleographer's Tools was honestly on the table, which is even worse).  I didn't want to use the word "Artist" simply because 5e already collectively refers to all tool/supply kits as "Artisan's Tools" and the two are too similar.  Kind of a weird dead-end in naming conventions for a system so focused on precise terminology, right?  It's Sauron/Saruman all over again.

Maybe something like a "Scribe's Tools", after the monks who made illuminated manuscripts?  Possibly with a little alchemical overlap for crafting your own inks/utensils.

Tinkering, Crafting, and Construction
Agreed on Glassblowing not quite fitting into Smithing; they both use heat forges, but it's a very different focus for intent.  I'd generally fit Glassblowing more alongside Jeweler's Tools functionality, especially when it comes to making glass jewelry.  But yeah, packaging all the broad craftsman's tools together and allowing the player to describe their own focus feels better than having a ton of individual ones bloating things out.

Things like Smithing, Carpentry, and Masonry honestly feel like major trades that stand alone since they each focus on large-scale construction or analysis.  They're fine as they are.  There'd be some minor overlap with other tool kits where armor and weapons were concerned (wood and leather vs. metal) but not enough to be an obstacle.

As for Tinker's Tools, I kind of feel like it's a tool kit looking for a purpose.  The skill descriptions in Xanathar's Guide makes it seem more like it's intended for research purposes rather than functional repairs, as 5e doesn't have a "damaged gear" system that would make it relevant for anything other than fluff.  It does potentially have more utility than "Mending" for a non-magical character or damage that is too big for a cantrip to handle.  I suppose it's more like "Thieves' Tools" in being directly tied to a PC ability with Gnomish tinkerers and hopes to stand alone in that regard.

Cook's Utensils
It's overall not that different from a "Mess Kit" in the equipment table; I suppose one could be more elaborate than another, but there's no actual mechanics attached to either to make it noteworthy.  Cooking needs some love in 5e - I see a lot of player homebrew stuff making cooking more useful and having it add temporary minor buffs, but that's easily a very slippery slope.  It might also have more outstanding use in games where food/drink management is part of the experience, or where food preparation to ensure it's safe to eat for survival factors in, but most games don't bother with that kind of minutia to begin with.  Reliable sustenance is just kind of a given in most cases.

Barring making some homebrew of our own for meals otherwise, I'd say Cook's Utensils are just one of those outliers that doesn't really fill a purpose in the system, but would be a blatant oversight if it wasn't there at all.

If I had to stab at it, I think a reasonable function Cook's Utensils might gain is allowing a character who has enough resources to feed themselves (such as from the Outlander's background ability, or a successful hunting/foraging skill check) could make a Ration as opposed to having to buy them?  Pass a skill check, get a Ration which are pretty much good forever.  Fail the DC and the food is still edible, but you screwed it up and it won't keep longer than normal.  There's some minor potential for seller's abuse (5 SP per Ration could yield a solid profit), but that could be handled easily by a DM using common sense with players trying to sell things they've crafted.

Artist vs Artisan
While I understand your concern, I think this is a case where accuracy triumphs over "readability". Artisan and Artist may look similar, but they have two distinct meanings. As for why they called it "Artisan's Tools", this probably relates back to WotC trying to emulate medieval guilds. I don't mind it, especially since I'm hard pressed to come up with a better descriptor. In the case of the Saruman/Sauron similarity, I feel it serves to add a bit of verisimilitude; a "real" world doesn't care if certain names/terms sound similar.

My problem with "Scribe's Tools" is that it's too closely linked to writing, and it would read that way for most. Besides, the monks were mostly concerned with copying biblical passages, and the adornment and miniature illustrations on illuminated manuscripts were always meant to supplement the text. Meanwhile, you have a ton of paintings popping up in this era that were hung up and viewed on their own (or laid on the ground, as is the case with byzantine mosaics, but that'd be masonry). Then again it's pointless to discuss paintings from just the early Middle Ages. I would imagine most people envision their Forgotten Realms' paintings more reminiscent of the Renaissance or Roman era. There's not too much information to be found on this exact topic on the wiki, understandably, but I did find this (https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/The_Prophet), which would be closer to paintings that cropped up in the late Middle Ages if one were to compare it an era. (Though I would think twice to consider one diegetic painting from one artist to be conclusive of the overarching style found within the fantasy world). I imagine many of the games implement some form of style, as they're forced to flesh out the visuals, and that it's again closer to Renaissance era, or Baroque, or any of the eras superseding the early/mid Middle Ages.

Regardless, my point is that illuminated manuscripts were only a small portion of what we might label "drawing" or "painting". "Scribe" is too closely related to writing alone for my taste. I would still be partial to "Artist's Tools".

Masonry and Carpentry
Right, I forgot Carpenter's Tools existed.

I agree, keeping them separate from Crafter's Tools is better, and I considered this when I was writing up that last post. While the tools one may employ may be somewhat similar, there's a clear difference in scale (in both tool and product), though masonry can be somewhat detail-oriented, if one considers sculpting or cartouches and similar decorative work. These two might crop up enough for them to warrant their own category in certain games, for example if you utilize strongholds, or if your game has lots (several months/years) of downtime to allow room for a character to construct something at scale. Would one bunch them together? If so, I run into the issue of coming up with a good all-encompassing name. "Builder's Tools"? Sounds less serious than both Masonry and Carpentry. Perhaps just leaving them separate is for the best.

Cooking and Food
Xanathar's ties Cook's Utensils to short rests (everyone gets to roll one extra Hit Dice), which seems very intuitive, but you run the risk of making it a must-have skill if you fumble the tuning and make it slightly too strong. It's never a question whether you will or won't have short rests, unlike many of these other Tools and Supplies, where you have to stumble upon a specific thing within the world for the proficiency and/or any extra abilities that come along to be useful.


Doesn't sound like a bad implementation. Make it so it has to take place during a short-rest and put a cap on how many rations the character can make, and I think you have a working system. If they wish to spend a considerable amount of downtime to forage and make rations at a profit, I'd just let them, similarly to how I'd let a smith forge weapons or a mason help with construction work to earn some change on the side.

Carpentry and Masonry
Yeah, they're best left alone.  Those two, and Vehicle Proficiency, are major trades where a character or NPC could reasonably make their entire living off doing just that alone.  Not only in the money it could make them, but the time required to perform the job meaning it would take up the majority of their days.  Like, a character might reasonably be able to do Woodcarving on the road to make extra coin between adventures, but Carpentry is a whole other beast.  It makes more sense for them to be their own individual Proficiencies rather than being bundled together.

Cook's Utensils
Honestly, I kind of feel like the very presence of Cook's Utensils Proficiency is odd.  The various examples of its uses listed in Xanathar's Guide feel like they're stretching to justify its existence.  The extra 1 HD per Short Rest is grand (especially since it would stack with a Bard's "Song of Rest" ability; dinner and a show), but the rest just seem like normal things anyone would be able to do.

I would understand a specific character not having basic cooking skills or understanding local food trends (a foreigner from a completely different region, a pampered Noble who's never had to cook for themselves, etc) but the broad majority of characters (and especially NPCs) in a given setting would reasonably be able to forage and cook for themselves as just part of daily living in a pseudo-medieval setting like this.  I feel like the current functions are so fundamental that everyone should just have the proficiency by default with specific exceptions, or that the functions need to be made more narrow and specialized to justify it being its own proficiency.

I don't know... I'm probably just overthinking it.  Perhaps the proficiency is meant to differentiate between someone who can cook and someone who's a notably good/technical chef.  It just feels like it's lacking as-written.


I'd set it as per Long Rest, myself, as drying/smoking/preserving food takes a fairly long period of time and Cook's Utensils already have a function set on Short Rest.

Help Action only applies in combat. What you're looking for is 'Working Together'. Or rather, the Help Action enables 'Working Together' in combat.


I'm not sure I should grant Mallory this Advantage. Working Together is very much dependent on the situation, so I should rule on it so that we avoid situations where players run haywire with it. Advantage is something that's not too easy to come by in other circumstances. Nor should it be. And I don't want Mallory to be granted Advantage on any Skill Check as long as Astre is present. While you absolutely haven't exploited it up until now (Mallory has made plenty of Arcana Checks without Astre's help, for instance), I'm wary of being too liberal in the allowance of Working Together with a Familiar. Especially since a Tressym is powerful enough as is.

But let's look at it from another point of view; would I grant Mallory Advantage on an Insight Check if Rhydd was the one helping her instead? Arguably, no. And there's nothing inherent to the Tressym that should separate Astre from Rhydd or any other Player Character in this case. I would certainly not count Keen Smell to be applicable in this scenario — the guard's tells are not going to be based on scents. There is, of course, his telepathic bond to Mallory to consider, which does make this slightly more of a gray area. Nonetheless, I suspect the designer left the last paragraph of the rule intentionally vague, so it would ultimately depend on DM judgement.

And here's my judgement: I'll allow it in this instance and (let this serve as a heads up) perhaps deny a similar use in the future. Think of it as an Inspiration for the help you've given me with collecting the information on crafting magic items.
This message was last edited by the GM at 22:06, Thu 13 Jan 2022.

Help vs. Working Together
Astute, though they are functionally the same thing and it's just easier to refer to them as "Help" across the board.

Caster/Familiar Combo
Mallory and Astre have used this sort of practice before with other skill checks without issue raised, such as with Survival and Investigation checks.  It's part of the character concept in that they each have opposite strengths and weaknesses to each other, and they work in unison buddy-cop style.  I'm certainly not going to say it isn't fishing for Advantage, but I do try to apply it only when I think it's reasonable to do so within the assisting character's capabilities.

By RAW, there's nothing at all preventing any Familiar - not just Tressyms - from assisting another creature at any time so long as the assistance can actually yield tangible benefits.  It's one of the core functions of having a Familiar, balanced by the fact that they cannot use the Attack Action to directly contribute to battle.  Though if you feel this is something that needs to be restricted then that's a matter of its own worth discussing.

Who's Assisting Who?
As narrated in the post, this isn't Astre helping Mallory but rather the other way around; she's assisting him.  Hence why the roll is using Astre's +1 WIS mod rather than Mallory's -1.  She's relying on his instincts to give her useful information that she can analyze and respond to.  My reasoning is animals are better at perceiving moods and nonverbal tells; they have a wider array of senses, much higher innate Perception, and greater capacity for nonverbal communication than Humans do, while she can contextualize what he notices and handle any more traditional psychological tells she notices herself.

As for something specific to Astre over other party members, it would be his existence as a Familiar.  He and Mallory are perpetually telepathically linked and have known each other their entire lives.  This is a thing they've done countless times before over the years and would reasonably have great familiarity with, not some impromptu stunt they just pull off the top of their heads.

Going Forward
I'm certainly fine with limiting use of this sort of action from here on out.  While I don't deny wanting to pick up every bit of an edge to our benefit as possible, I'm not inclined to try and to squeeze our Advantage non-stop or create any ruling issues.  I'll be certain to ask next time there's a situation where the benefit of assistance wouldn't be obvious outright.

Not that it matters since she'll be within range for Levitate regardless, but wouldn't this necessitate 35' of movement? 5' to get to the opening in the Rope Trick Room, 10' to get down, 15' left over to get to the N column at best, and 5' more feet to get to the M column. 35'. This is why I've positioned both Rhydd and Khulekani in the N column.

I'm just wondering if I'm missing something since both Rhydd and you have specified the M column as your destination now. But as I said, Mallory will still be exactly 12 squares away from the Werewolverine if she stands in N5.
This message was last edited by the GM at 12:39, Tue 12 July 2022.

I wasn't counting the 5' to get to the opening of the Rope Trick because that operates on the idea that Mallory would first step over the entryway and then begin her descent.  My interpretation was that she just went from where she was standing directly to her descent down the rope; mechanically, it's moving diagonally into an adjacent square.

Imagine you were perched atop the edge of a wall.  There's a difference in how you move through space if you stood up and then walked directly off forward into space to drop down versus if you slid yourself off the edge downward.

As for where Mallory ends up, the intent was to be behind or beside Rhydd in some manner so she wouldn't be in his way, wherever that ends up being.

Aaah, I see. Diagonal movement in three dimensional space. For flying in open air I would fully accept it. However, in this particular case, I could see it argued one way or the other. Your character still has to move across the flat plane and grab the rope, which I assume they do before they fully begin their descent. You would necessarily have an flipped L-shape movement, making the first 5' count.

But if it were steps (meaning a 5' drop to the adjacent square) it would definitely not cost 10' of movement. The existence of the rope, and the fact that it's more than a 5' drop, is what complicates things somewhat.

Either way, Rhydd bears no penalty from Mallory being in front of him, but I see the narrative reasons for why Mallory would be either beside or behind Rhydd and not in front. We'll keep the battlemap as is and I'll make the correction if ever this scenario reoccurs.

Would Tongues work in conjuction with Speak with Dead? Tongues requires a willing Creature, while Speak with Dead requires a Corpse.



I am hesitant to allow this, since it would require classifying the skull as a Creature, which it probably isn't. The workaround would be to animate it, since it would then become both a Corpse and a Creature. I don't know of any Necromancy that can animate just a skull, though.

And because it was interesting, I also ran into some conflicting opinions on whether or not Speak with Dead can be cast on skeletons (lower case 's') and by extension skulls.

Furthermore;

Whether or not the head bone structure in conjunction with the jaw is up for debate. I have not specified if the skull even has a jaw, as I believe those do tend to come loose if the bones get jingled up. This does rule out casting Speak with Dead on a finger bones, though, as if a skull is eligible as a 'corpse', so would any other part of the skeleton be.

But I'm going to allow Speak with Dead. Seems silly not to. Plus, we run into some weird territory if we disallow casting it on a skeleton, as the spell does not specify how fresh the corpse has to be, so we're left to speculate on how much tissue a skeleton must have before it becomes a corpse.
This message was last edited by the GM at 17:29, Wed 02 Aug 2023.

For what it's worth, extreme cold tends to mummify soft tissues that would otherwise rot away. Entirely possible that there's enough mass left around the jaw hinges for it to be a stiff but functional "mouth."

In reply to Idrianthe Mar (msg # 40):

Granted, but the skull was gobbled up by one of the Black Oozes. That would make short work of any residual tissue.

Edit: Sorry, I realize now we may be talking about different skulls. There were two you found; one on the scholar in the study, and one (aberrant) you found in the chamber above the disc room. It makes sense if you're talking about the latter. Did you take the aberrant one with you? I don't remember.
This message was last edited by the GM at 17:37, Wed 02 Aug 2023.

I actually forgot there were two skulls! I don't remember which we took, that will be for Mallory to answer.

Totally agreebabout the ooze-consumed skull, those soft tissues were definitely being digested and wouldn't benefit from low temperature.

Actually we have five skulls.  The Netherese Scholar, the Aberrant Skull Floating in Ooze, the Caged Thri-Kreen, the Gnomish Ceremorph Corpse, and Apple's Corpse.  All presumably viable for "Speak with Dead", barring any sort of overt destruction.

Speak With Dead
The spell says the skull needs to have "a mouth", not "a jaw".  Strictly speaking, the upper jaw/maxilla portion of the skull is part of the mouth, lower jaw/mandible notwithstanding.  In cases where I've had to DM it, I've always ruled that so long as the skull is mostly intact and not just in fragments, the spell works.  But that's my take.

Tongues' Target
The target of the spell would be whoever is asking questions of a given skull, not the skull itself.  For example, if Mallory casts it on Vellynne, she'll be able to understand any language - Loross included.  The questionable part comes in the second half of the spell text.


That's the rub and the big gamble here.  The skull doesn't qualify as being a Creature and "Speak with Dead" only allows it to communicate with the languages it knew in life.  So unless the skull's spirit knows a compatible language that Vellynne herself speaks, she might not be able to actually ask it any questions herself.  For example, if the skull exclusively speaks Loross, we're out of luck because it won't be able to understand the questions we ask it.  But if it also speaks Common, Draconic, Elvish, or some other language that would've been commonplace at the time it was alive, we're good to go.
This message was last edited by the player at 02:54, Thu 03 Aug 2023.

Alright. My original ruling stands; all fully or mostly intact skulls regardless of degree of decomposition are considered Corpses and are thus eligible for Speak with Dead. None of them are eligible as either the target or the effects of Tongues, as none are Creatures.
This message was last edited by the GM at 07:13, Thu 03 Aug 2023.

Range
While it is true that a Tressym can detect if something is Poisonous through either Taste, Touch, or Smell without the need for a roll, a range to the ability is not specified, nor is there any mention on the matter of checking many different items at the same time to determine which (if any) items are poisonous. There are two different interpretations of the rule the way I see it:

1. The Tressym can determine whether or not one specific item is Poisonous by being in close proximity to it and sensing it specifically.
   
2. The Tressym can determine whether or not any item in the range of its sensing is Poisonous.

2 is obviously more powerful than 1. One is a close-proximety detector where each item has to be sensed in turn, while the other is an ambient Poison detector running continously. In the case of Taste or Touch, it is obvious 1 is the correct interpretation, because you have to be in direct contact with something Taste or Touch to sense it specifically. Smell is different, but my initial inclination is to interpret it to be limited in the same way Taste or Touch is, since they are all mentioned with equal emphasis. But Smell is obviously different from Taste or Touch and can be better compared to Hearing or Sight. should we accept 2, two outcomes are possible in the case where Poison is detected:

1. The Tressym knows there is one or several Poisonous item in the range of its Smelling ability without knowing how many or which specifically.
   
2. The Tressym knows exactly which item or items in the range of its Smelling ability is Poisonous and how many there are of them without the need for further investigation.

Now, you do mentioned Astre is only checking the tea (specific), but that the casting is done subtly and out of Harai's line of sight (distant). It is logical that unless Harai's line of sight is diverted through distraction, the tea will be within it. Hence, Astre is not able to stick his snout into the cup without being discovered.

But he might not have to depending on the range of the ability. It's not specified, so it's probably just up to each DM. I'll have to arbitrarily settle on a number as a cats range of smelling in the real world is too far to inform my decision (4 miles is probably too far). This is also a Magical ability we can assume is inherent only of Tressyms, so it's direct transcription to a cat's ordinary smell is not given. I'll rule that the Tressym can detect if any items within 15' are Poisonous, as long as the smell is not restricted or blocked from reaching Astre (e.g. kept in a container which fully prevents the smell from leaking). Astre is certainly within 15' in this specific circumstance.

Accuracy (Proximity and Direction)
Is Smell a directional sense? If Astre moves, he can probably determine where the scent is coming from, but can he if he remains stationary? Hearing and seeing is directional because we (and Tressyms) have two eyes and two ears, each of which registers the sensory input slightly differently (angle in the case of eyes, and time in the case of ears). We (and cats) also have two nostrils, but they are so close together that we humans, at least, are incapable of immediately determining the proximity and direction of the smell without multiple samples (i.e. changing our reference point by moving). It is possible a cat can. A Hammerhead shark can, because its nostrils are spaced so far apart. This is an aside anyway, as Astre can probably accurately determine the proximity and direction by moving his head slightly.

With this in mind, I'll rule that the Tressym can accurately determine within 15' which items are Poisonous and where they are located.

Confidence
Does it matter how strong the smell of the Poison is? RAW, no. In the context of realism of the fictional world? Probably. Different Poisons have different chemical compositions and would emit different odors. Those can be stronger or weaker, depending on. They can also be masked by overlapping odors, such as the one of the tea. How weak does a Poison have to be for a Tressym to be unsure if there is any close by?

But I don't want a roll to be necessary in every circumstance where a Poison is not present, as it would severely inhibit the strength of the ability. I'd also argue it wouldn't be RAW to gate the certainty behind the results of a roll, as it contains no mentions of any rolls.

Conclusion
A Tressym is always able to determine precisely which items are Poisonous and which aren't within 15', so long as their scent is able to reach him. No rolls are necessary.

This also means it is never necessary to for a Tressym to sense a Poison by Taste or Touch (barring the exceptional case of the loss of its Smelling ability), but that's an inevitable consequence of how the ability is written . . .

The more I think about it, the more I think it should be possible to make a carbon copy, without understanding the spell or the notation it is written in, in less time than it takes to transcribe the spell in your own notation (thereby copying it, as per the rules on a Wizard's Spellbook). We would, however, have to come up with some additional rules . . . Something like 'half the time requirement and without the cost'. We could hammer down something solid.

I am, just for the sake of simplicity, inclined to say that she needs access to the original works at all times. It does run a bit contrary to the edition to construct new rules to accurately simulate every single edge case we can think of. But I'll chew on it for a day, then I'll get back to you.

Very good question. If we scale proportionally we would get:



I have to consider that Colmarr did reach into a smaller Hole to pull out the marble he had dropped in, so while I do think this would severely limit the usefulness of the smaller holes, I'm inclined to keep them as is. But let's bump them up somewhat as we round for the sake of tidiness.


How does that look?



I wanted a way to simulate a bartering scenario where prices fluctuate. It could have been achieved with the "Selling a Magic Item" modifier, although the one I propose is more flexible, if a tad more complicated. As for evaluating the price based off of RAW, it is indeed a Rare item (the full version of the Ise Rune is Very Rare). I tried to consult the tables in this pdf (https://drive.google.com/file/...HUken0_UhQ3Apa6g4SJA), but found it unlisted, so I instead used the lower threshold of Rare items and landed on 1,000 gp.

If we were to make my rules a bit more flexible so that Mallory can add more items to the formula it'd be fairly simple, as 100 is 10% of 1,000.



Err, yeah. The equation did get a bit more complicated than I intended once I had to include all the steps. Alternatively a table could be used, with values from 10-20+ with intervals of 2. That said, this is a more interesting rule for two reasons;

1. It scales for rolls between 10-20, whereas the table in "Selling a Magic Item" only affects rolls 1-10 and roll 21+.
   
2. The player has to set the DC themselves prior to rolling, which adds an element of 'how far they wish to push their luck'.

Whether or not you care for the 50% reduction at a lower roll is a separate matter. I personally don't.
This message was last edited by the GM at 09:34, Tue 27 Feb.

Re-scaled Portable Hole Values
I'm on the fence about the adjusted values as I'm left trying to balance them against their applied usefulness versus other options.  The perks of a "Portable Hole" definitely contribute to its greater worth (functionally weightless, can be more easily transported/smuggled than any other form of storage, no risk of rupturing via physical damage, not limited by weight capacity - only space), but the greatly diminished interior capacity as-listed (and inability to reasonably use it while on the move/in action scenes) still makes it functionally inferior to an Uncommon-tier and presumably much more affordable "Bag of Holding".

The 8" x 2' hole has an interior volume of .70 cubic feet, which is smaller than a standard 2 GP Backpack.
The 1' x 3' hole has an interior volume of 2.36 cubic feet, which is around as much as a 4 SP Basket or a few 1 CP cloth Sacks.

Beyond that, the other two versions greatly outdo a "Bag of Holding" in terms of volume, as expected.  It's an absolutely massive jump in volumetric capacity.  But the smaller iterations are so vastly inferior in terms of carrying capacity that Mallory would be better served buying material components from Colmarr and crafting her own "Bag of Holding" since it would be cheaper and more space-efficient.  I guess having the prices be set out so high for what is essentially a very niche and experimentally-designed item makes sense for the "living breathing world that's not revolving around the Party" aspect, but it does also leave little recourse in the gameplay facet of the situation.  The only reason I'm looking to pick up extradimensional storage space is because I've had Mallory collecting components to a point that I can no longer internally justify her hauling everything in her own backpack, and I can't have her dragging a hand wagon behind her everywhere.  Her mount is gone too, so no handwaving such items as being "in the saddlebags/strapped to Wifni".  But the first two smaller versions of the "Portable Hole" don't perform to the need, so they're basically a non-factor in the discussion to begin with.  The latter two fit her space needs but the cost/bargaining DC is up in the air until we figure out the actual value Colmarr places on the total goods she's offering to sell him/let him study.

Personally, I would round out the listed dimensions as-listed, like so:

8k GP:   6' x 10' (282 cu ft, Standard item specs: basically the size of a commercial cargo van)
3k GP:   4' x  8' (100 cu ft, superior to a Bag of Holding in every regard except accessibility)
2k GP:   3' x  8' (56 cu ft; drastic drop in capacity didn't feel right and I wanted to include a midway.  Relatively comparable to a "Bag of Holding")
1k GP:   2' x  6' (18 cu ft, inferior to Bag of Holding, but greater than Handy Haversack or mundane options)
750 GP:  1' x  4' (3 cu ft, inferior to Handy Haversack's main storage but greater than mundane options)
        10" x  2' (1 cu ft, equal to a Backpack's capacity but with the perks of being a Portable Hole. Colmarr's demo item/original prototype, not for sale)

In Mallory's personal case, she'd go for the 2k option, as that best suits both her potential price range via bartering, her storage needs, and a usefully smaller space requirement for opening the "Portable Hole" - it would fit comfortably on most any given tabletop, floor space, or wall without needing to rearrange furniture.

Bartering and Magic Item Price Scale
I think I need to see more examples and in-practice uses before I can really chime in on how workable this is.  Bartering itself can be so heavily influenced by narrative factors that it's hard to nail down prices in the first place.  It just particularly stood out in this case because of the severe shift in volumetric capacity/functional effectiveness of the different tiers of "Portable Holes" that the pricing didn't seem to match up with the actual usefulness against comparable, cheaper items.

For the time being, by all means let's go with whatever you feel is best to work with.  If it turns out we don't like it in the long run and want to tweak it later on, we can just say it was a particular case of Colmarr's mercantile habits and not a standard norm of economics.
This message was last edited by the player at 21:47, Tue 27 Feb.

Available Portable Holes
I'm happy adding another option that mirrors the usefulness of a Bag of Holding, even though the price for the full-scale Portable Hole, which is ordinarily the only one for purchase going by RAW and a Rare item, is much higher than that of a Bag of Holding, an Uncommon item. We can reconcile the lack of this option up until now by saying it is the one Colmarr personally uses, but is willing to part with in the absence of another deal.

So the 3′ x 8′ Portable Hole will be for sale at 2k gp.

Bartering
Considering it a bit more, my custom equation isn't actually any more complicated than any RAW rules, as there are no RAW rules. You would have to combine the Selling and Buying ruleset somehow, and they seem like oil and water due to the difference in how to calculate the prices of wares. The best course would likely be to handle the Selling of the Magic Item, then handle the Buying, and the player has to beg to the high powers the d10 lands low. In most cases the trade ends up unfavorable to the player, with the added downside of extreme swings. In the worst case scenario a Rare item the player wants to trade for another Rare item could only be 2,000 gp of the 10,000 gp required, and you are partly beholden to dice without modifiers.

I say we try my approach. To reiterate; set a DC then roll against it. On a fail, Mallory gets no discount and must provide items of value corresponding to the cost of the item she wants to trade for or make up for the difference with gp.

I'll make an IC post that gives the values of the other items Colmarr is interested in later today.
This message was last edited by the GM at 09:22, Wed 28 Feb.

Could anyone in the immediate vicinity, say Tym or Mallory if not Stormheart, use the Help action to negate the Disadvantage?  Following the RAW, that is.

From a story perspective, I know that Tym is most decidedly not designed for scouting.  But, the Help action seems to be designed as part of the push to reduce the reliance on detailed skills from previous versions of the game.  As such, a character's competency in a particular skill doesn't seem to be much of an issue.

Yes; that is what Astre is in essence doing here. Just to clarify, Working Together is essentially the Help Action when applied to non-combat contexts. (Help vs. Working Together). Quite nitpicky, and I recognize that it's colloquially always referred to as the Help Action regardless of whether or not it is applied in combat.


It is left intentionally vague and up to the DM:


So while the character doesn't necessarily need to be proficient in the task they lend aid in, it needs to make sense that the task is made easier with help, or that the efforts somehow add up to better solve the given task. In this specific instance, I imagine Astre is telepathically communicating what he sees to Mallory, who is then able to guide Rhydd's attention to points of interest he might have otherwise missed. I would be hesitant to grant Tympani and Rhydd Working Together, as opposed to Astre and Rhydd, since Tympani shares his perspective from the sled and is not otherwise proficient in Perception. Stormheart would and could have aided Rhydd by portioning the landscape, say to the north and south, which would have made the task simpler since they would have had less area to focus on. Alas, I won't allow Working Together to stack, as mentioned.