Noticed this on a character of one of my players; character name is Rava in the DWC3 campaign, if an admin wants to peek at it.
The Sending Stones items add the Sending spell to the spell list when they're equipped, but currently (since the character sheet framework rollout, I believe) they are compounding those spells. Each Sending Stone in their inventory adds a Sending spell for every stone, instead of just for itself. You can see this behavior on the stones, as well as in the spell list for the character.
I did also try removing them and re-adding, in case it was just a bug from the upgrade, but the problem persisted and I can replicate it on any character by adding multiple Sending Stones to their inventory.
Each pair of Sending Stones allows for a single 1ce/day casting of the spell between the stones of that pair. Because of that, since your character is holding 4 pairs of stones, each pair has to add its own 1ce/day casting of the spell. It seems like the character sheet can’t tell one pair from another and since there’s 4 pairs in inventory, it thinks that each pair is adding 4 castings, so it’s totaling them up and 4*4=16. Very strange glitch indeed.
Each pair of Sending Stones allows for a single 1ce/day casting of the spell between the stones of that pair. Because of that, since your character is holding 4 pairs of stones, each pair has to add its own 1ce/day casting of the spell. It seems like the character sheet can’t tell one pair from another and since there’s 4 pairs in inventory, it thinks that each pair is adding 4 castings, so it’s totaling them up and 4*4=16. Very strange glitch indeed.
But 4 stones is only 6 pairs. Even if each pair adds 2 spells, that would only be 12 not 16. Also, 3 stones would be 6 not 9, 2 would be 2 not 4, and 1 would be 0 not 1.
Neat theory (I kind of wish that is what happened), but math doesn't support it.
Each pair of Sending Stones allows for a single 1ce/day casting of the spell between the stones of that pair. Because of that, since your character is holding 4 pairs of stones, each pair has to add its own 1ce/day casting of the spell. It seems like the character sheet can’t tell one pair from another and since there’s 4 pairs in inventory, it thinks that each pair is adding 4 castings, so it’s totaling them up and 4*4=16. Very strange glitch indeed.
But 4 stones is only 6 pairs. Even if each pair adds 2 spells, that would only be 12 not 16. Also, 3 stones would be 6 not 9, 2 would be 2 not 4, and 1 would be 0 not 1.
Neat theory (I kind of wish that is what happened), but math doesn't support it.
I think you just accidentally proved me right. Because you said “But 4 stones is only 6 pairs....”
But you, me, and everybody else knows“1 Pair” = “2 Items” so therefor the “6 Pairs” you mentioned are “12 Items” and 4=/=12! However 4=16 according to the OP. And I can prove it mathematically!
Unfortunately for you, the last time I took programming was back when Pascal and C++ were still relevant computer languages. So my explanation will seem... be nice to me and say “quaint” by comparison to computers now. Sorry, but it’ll be like an ancient Celt talking to a modern scientist and the only language the have in common is Latin, so the internet is just gonna have to stick with me. I may not be current on the lingo, but I don’t have to be to know haw a computer “thinks.”
We just had a misunderstanding based in part because of two absolutely rational, yet completely opposite interpretations of the same concept. That’s what happened to the people who did the data entry, and because, until true AI* happens, computers are still dependent on what people tell them is true for the fundamental basis of what is or is not possible. Which means if we people tell a computer that the absolute impossible is true, the computer will either figure out a way to make itTRUE, or it will crash trying over and over until either it’s basis for reality is given new/different input, or we put it out of its misery.
*
(Google took the first gimongous baby steps a little while ago.)
Here’s the difference in interpretation that caused the entire problem. Imagine we both do data entry for DDB, but we both work in different departments that both have something to do with how this Magic Item and the Spell it attaches interact with the Character Sheet. We both look at Sending Stones and read:
Sending Stones come in pairs, with each smooth stone carved to match the other so the pairing is easily recognized. While you touch one stone, you can use an action to cast the sending spell from it. The target is the bearer of the other stone. If no creature bears the other stone, you know that fact as soon as you use the stone and don't cast the spell.
Once sending is cast through the stones, they can't be used again until the next dawn. If one of the stones in a pair is destroyed, the other one becomes nonmagical.
And we both walk away imagining that there is no possible way to misinterpret that.
One of us read “Sending Stones come in pairs....” logically assessed that, and told the computer.... This Is TRUE: Sending Stones = “1 Pair” = “2 Stones” = 1 Sending
One of us read that exact same description and logically deduced that if I PC is carrying both stones then they are functionally useless, so when a Character Sheet loads that Magic Item, it must only be one out of the pair. So they told the computer.... This Is TRUE: Sending Stones = “1 Stone” = 1 Sending
(Okay, so this is where that “quaint” language might make some of you laugh or cringe or something, sorry notsorry.)
The computer took both of those “TRUTHS” and started crunching and crunching until it did what computers do and made itTRUE!
Noticed this on a character of one of my players; character name is Rava in the DWC3 campaign, if an admin wants to peek at it.
The Sending Stones items add the Sending spell to the spell list when they're equipped, but currently (since the character sheet framework rollout, I believe) they are compounding those spells. Each Sending Stone in their inventory adds a Sending spell for every stone, instead of just for itself. You can see this behavior on the stones, as well as in the spell list for the character.
I did also try removing them and re-adding, in case it was just a bug from the upgrade, but the problem persisted and I can replicate it on any character by adding multiple Sending Stones to their inventory.
Each pair of Sending Stones allows for a single 1ce/day casting of the spell between the stones of that pair. Because of that, since your character is holding 4 pairs of stones, each pair has to add its own 1ce/day casting of the spell. It seems like the character sheet can’t tell one pair from another and since there’s 4 pairs in inventory, it thinks that each pair is adding 4 castings, so it’s totaling them up and 4*4=16. Very strange glitch indeed.
But 4 stones is only 6 pairs. Even if each pair adds 2 spells, that would only be 12 not 16. Also, 3 stones would be 6 not 9, 2 would be 2 not 4, and 1 would be 0 not 1.
Neat theory (I kind of wish that is what happened), but math doesn't support it.
I think you just accidentally proved me right. Because you said “But 4 stones is only 6 pairs....”
But you, me, and everybody else knows“1 Pair” = “2 Items” so therefor the “6 Pairs” you mentioned are “12 Items” and 4=/=12! However 4=16 according to the OP. And I can prove it mathematically!
Some nonsense about 2=4, but 1≠2, therefore I'm right because TRUE = TRUE, because "programming language," omitted for brevity and sanity.
So basically, what you are saying is that you think 1 dev programmed it correctly (n items = n spells) and another dev programmed it incorrectly (n items = n²-n spells, the mathematical formula for "number of pairs in a set"), and then because of a complicated multiparagraph explanation on machine logic that makes some logical leaps that don't quite track, the site thinks 4=16.
No really, that explanation makes no sense. At what point did you explain how "2 items = 2 stones = 4 stones = 2 spells" means "2 items = 4 spells"?
You made another logical leap when "2=4" means every input should be squared for some reason. Jumping from "2 items = 4 spells" to "3 items = 9 spells, etc" with nothing in between.
Your whole explanation seems to revolve around the site being able to arbitrarily decide numerical relationships. I guarantee you the site does not have that capability. It is a glorified calculator. Not a rudimentary AI.
Are you committed to that long logical mess or do you think it could just be because the site simply does both outputs and n²-n+n=n²? (If that is even what actually happened)
Not quite. I think both Devs programmed it correctly for different applications, but the program cannot tell those two different applications apart. One Dev correctly programmed the item itself as a pair of stones. One Dev correctly programmed the computer that when the character sheet loads the item, it’s only supposed to be half of the pair. And somehow, by whatever logic it applies it’s getting those two facts confused and is squaring the number instead of just adding them.
Also, my argument is entirely based on what I learned in computer programming classes I took way back when in school. I’ll never forget that one of the very first lessons the professor ever taught us was:
Computers are still dependent on what people tell them is true for the fundamental basis of what is or is not possible. Which means if we people tell a computer that the absolute impossible is true, the computer will either figure out a way to make itTRUE, or it will crash trying over and over until either it’s basis for reality is given new/different input, or we put it out of its misery.
However it happened is irrelevant, it happened. Somehow someway, the computer was given contradictory information, and it just did it’s best to make sense of it. I have in fact quite literally seen a computer prove that 2=4 simply because of a simple data entry error.
Also, I guarantee that the site’s algorithms are capable of that kind of calculation. That “glorified calculator” is thousands of times as capable as the programs we wrote in the 1990s using Pascal on computers that could barely run Windows 3.1 and one of the first things we learned was how to get a program to prove that 2=4. (Like the first thing one learns in martial arts is how to fall.)
Finally, yes I did skip a few steps in my explanation because those intervening steps were irrelevant. Here is the proof that the site thinks Sending Stones*(n) = (n²)*Sending, are you ready for it? Here it comes!
Noticed this on a character of one of my players; character name is Rava in the DWC3 campaign, if an admin wants to peek at it.
The Sending Stones items add the Sending spell to the spell list when they're equipped, but currently (since the character sheet framework rollout, I believe) they are compounding those spells. Each Sending Stone in their inventory adds a Sending spell for every stone, instead of just for itself. You can see this behavior on the stones, as well as in the spell list for the character.
I did also try removing them and re-adding, in case it was just a bug from the upgrade, but the problem persisted and I can replicate it on any character by adding multiple Sending Stones to their inventory.
Noticed this on a character of one of my players; character name is Rava in the DWC3 campaign, if an admin wants to peek at it.
The Sending Stones items add the Sending spell to the spell list when they're equipped, but currently (since the character sheet framework rollout, I believe) they are compounding those spells. Each Sending Stone in their inventory adds a Sending spell for every stone, instead of just for itself. You can see this behavior on the stones, as well as in the spell list for the character.
1 Sending Stone = 1 Sending spell
2 Sending Stones = 4 Sending spells
3 Sending Stones = 9 Sending spells
4 Sending Stones = 16 Sending spells
And so on.
Here's example images. In this case, the player has 4 Sending Stones, so each Sending Stone is adding 4 copies of Sending to her spell list.
https://i.imgur.com/fTx5gAJ.png
https://i.imgur.com/h4v6eyv.png
I did also try removing them and re-adding, in case it was just a bug from the upgrade, but the problem persisted and I can replicate it on any character by adding multiple Sending Stones to their inventory.
Huh. How does it even do that?
Each pair of Sending Stones allows for a single 1ce/day casting of the spell between the stones of that pair. Because of that, since your character is holding 4 pairs of stones, each pair has to add its own 1ce/day casting of the spell. It seems like the character sheet can’t tell one pair from another and since there’s 4 pairs in inventory, it thinks that each pair is adding 4 castings, so it’s totaling them up and 4*4=16. Very strange glitch indeed.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
But 4 stones is only 6 pairs. Even if each pair adds 2 spells, that would only be 12 not 16. Also, 3 stones would be 6 not 9, 2 would be 2 not 4, and 1 would be 0 not 1.
Neat theory (I kind of wish that is what happened), but math doesn't support it.
I think you just accidentally proved me right. Because you said “But 4 stones is only 6 pairs....”
But you, me, and everybody else knows “1 Pair” = “2 Items” so therefor the “6 Pairs” you mentioned are “12 Items” and 4=/=12! However 4=16 according to the OP. And I can prove it mathematically!
Unfortunately for you, the last time I took programming was back when Pascal and C++ were still relevant computer languages. So my explanation will seem... be nice to me and say “quaint” by comparison to computers now. Sorry, but it’ll be like an ancient Celt talking to a modern scientist and the only language the have in common is Latin, so the internet is just gonna have to stick with me. I may not be current on the lingo, but I don’t have to be to know haw a computer “thinks.”
We just had a misunderstanding based in part because of two absolutely rational, yet completely opposite interpretations of the same concept. That’s what happened to the people who did the data entry, and because, until true AI* happens, computers are still dependent on what people tell them is true for the fundamental basis of what is or is not possible. Which means if we people tell a computer that the absolute impossible is true, the computer will either figure out a way to make it TRUE, or it will crash trying over and over until either it’s basis for reality is given new/different input, or we put it out of its misery.
*
(Google took the first gimongous baby steps a little while ago.)
Here’s the difference in interpretation that caused the entire problem. Imagine we both do data entry for DDB, but we both work in different departments that both have something to do with how this Magic Item and the Spell it attaches interact with the Character Sheet. We both look at Sending Stones and read:
And we both walk away imagining that there is no possible way to misinterpret that.
One of us read “Sending Stones come in pairs....” logically assessed that, and told the computer....
This Is TRUE: Sending Stones = “1 Pair” = “2 Stones” = 1 Sending
One of us read that exact same description and logically deduced that if I PC is carrying both stones then they are functionally useless, so when a Character Sheet loads that Magic Item, it must only be one out of the pair. So they told the computer....
This Is TRUE: Sending Stones = “1 Stone” = 1 Sending
(Okay, so this is where that “quaint” language might make some of you laugh or cringe or something, sorry notsorry.)
The computer took both of those “TRUTHS” and started crunching and crunching until it did what computers do and made it TRUE!
And
And
So what happens when a computer decides that the only possible way for TRUE = TRUE is for 2 = 4? It makes 2 = 4!
So, because TRUE = TRUE what does it conclude?
And do you know how I know? Because TRUE = TRUE!
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Out of curiosity, did they ever get that glitch fixed?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
So basically, what you are saying is that you think 1 dev programmed it correctly (n items = n spells) and another dev programmed it incorrectly (n items = n²-n spells, the mathematical formula for "number of pairs in a set"), and then because of a complicated multiparagraph explanation on machine logic that makes some logical leaps that don't quite track, the site thinks 4=16.
No really, that explanation makes no sense. At what point did you explain how "2 items = 2 stones = 4 stones = 2 spells" means "2 items = 4 spells"?
You made another logical leap when "2=4" means every input should be squared for some reason. Jumping from "2 items = 4 spells" to "3 items = 9 spells, etc" with nothing in between.
Your whole explanation seems to revolve around the site being able to arbitrarily decide numerical relationships. I guarantee you the site does not have that capability. It is a glorified calculator. Not a rudimentary AI.
Are you committed to that long logical mess or do you think it could just be because the site simply does both outputs and n²-n+n=n²? (If that is even what actually happened)
Not quite. I think both Devs programmed it correctly for different applications, but the program cannot tell those two different applications apart. One Dev correctly programmed the item itself as a pair of stones. One Dev correctly programmed the computer that when the character sheet loads the item, it’s only supposed to be half of the pair. And somehow, by whatever logic it applies it’s getting those two facts confused and is squaring the number instead of just adding them.
Also, my argument is entirely based on what I learned in computer programming classes I took way back when in school. I’ll never forget that one of the very first lessons the professor ever taught us was:
However it happened is irrelevant, it happened. Somehow someway, the computer was given contradictory information, and it just did it’s best to make sense of it. I have in fact quite literally seen a computer prove that 2=4 simply because of a simple data entry error.
Also, I guarantee that the site’s algorithms are capable of that kind of calculation. That “glorified calculator” is thousands of times as capable as the programs we wrote in the 1990s using Pascal on computers that could barely run Windows 3.1 and one of the first things we learned was how to get a program to prove that 2=4. (Like the first thing one learns in martial arts is how to fall.)
Finally, yes I did skip a few steps in my explanation because those intervening steps were irrelevant. Here is the proof that the site thinks Sending Stones*(n) = (n²)*Sending, are you ready for it? Here it comes!
Tada!!!!
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Just because the computer languages I learned are 20+ years obsolete does not mean that the fundamental lessons no longer apply.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting