Ok I had this thought so instead of just you know winning like the wizard could do what could the wizard do if he wanted a slugging match instead of the I win if I have a turn thing. Say the wizard goes first I think the first thing he would do is wish… for a simulacrum and depending on his opponent if they are ether ranged or melee they simulacrum would cast the appropriate spell if ranged probably something along the line of warding wind or up casted invisibility, warding wind or some type of ward, wall, or distance making spell while if melee an 4th level fly for both wizards would be most appropriate to get out of range. So as for melee your kinda just screw as you can’t do anything against the wizard who’s to far away. So most builds should be ranged builds.
But yeah how would you think a slugging match would go between a fighter and wizard?
If the wizard has polymorph the fighter is going down in a slugfest....as they can literally change into a giant ape and beat the fighter into submission.
Man I would hate to have to fight a wizard with 2 levels of fighter though....action surge on a wizard is crazy good.
Geann this one you just can’t say no to… maybe hahaha.
“I Wish, that the Fundamental Forces of Power within the Universe would grant me the following wish, and through the following words, I wish, desire, and long for my current target to die forever, and for this desire to be realized without complication, and/or being unduly altered.”
Error 404:
no being or force called "Fundamental Forces of Power" found. Please try again.
Answer: Well me and Geann had a this thing where he was like “but what are you wishing to?” and I was like “the cosmos as that is were the wizard draws his power from so the cosmos?” then he made the wish with the beginning part and now we are here I guess.
If you look at the beginning description of the wizard it says ”Drawing on the subtle weave of magic that permeates the cosmos“ so yeah I guess it’s the cosmos in a way and the magical weave in the other so yeah.
also there are weird ways of interpreting this segment:
"(...) and for this desire to be realized without complication, and/or being unduly altered.”
it could be interpreted as:
wish must be both realized without complication and also without being unduly altered
wish must be both realized without complication and must also be unduly altered in some way
wish must be either realized without complication or it can be unduly altered, the caster does not care much either way
“Wish must be realized without any complications or unduly alterations” that is what it means… and when I think about it do you even need the and/or since or works perfectly fine in this context even without the “and” part.
you have also made it clear that the wish starts after "following words" but you don't make it clear when the wish ends, so after you have said all that it is possible that the spell is still listening for further instructions, think of it like programming in c#, you have written a line of code but you have completely forgotten to write a semicolon at the end.
Answer: How would you end and as for the “following words” thing I could just get rid of the previous thing to be:
“I wish, desire, and long for my current target to die forever, and for this desire to be realized without being unduly complicated, or being unduly altered against my wish.”
This one seems really good wish wise although as for the last bit it could use some revisions perhaps.
Not to mention how the wish does not have a clear definition of what a "complication" means. Maybe the wish blows up the planet you are on, because how is it supposed to know that not having a planet anymore is a "complication". Also complication from whose perspective? Is it from the perspective of an deity? From the perspective of the wizard? From the perspective of the monk about to get killed?
Answer: See above
You can never construct a sentence that contains no ambiguity, and all you have done here is make the wish a bit more clunky. Like honestly it might be better to just ****ing say "all monk die, me no die" or "i wish for everyone wearing [whatever armor the fighter is wearing] would have their consciousnesses permanently removed from existance without anyone not wearing [armor the fighter is wearing] being affected" something to that effect, instead of trying to target just the monk or just the fighter, target a broad demographic that ultimately includes your opponent but not you.
Does it really matter in this whiteroom scenario if you accidentally caused a little genocide, caused a million orphans and probably became the BBEG to a future adventuring party along the way?
Answer: I bet that with enough revision and such you could make a phrase to make the wish only be able to make the wish succeed or fail. As for genocide who cares for that if you win…
also if the opponent died of old age, you did not win the fight. In that scenario Age, the horrible thing that has killed the most humans on the planet would be the winner of the fight, not you. Your lazy ass did nothing while the reaper collected his dues for the fighter and along with him several other people, it would be closer to a draw. If the opponent's death is by natural causes you did not kill him.
Time ravage might be slightly more valid for this purpose as you caused death by old age to happen slightly faster than what the fighter would have anyways but that is about it
Answer: Well then is this a deathmatch or a death match since if it is the former that’d mean whoever does first loses while the latter is whoever kills the other first wins. But then we get into the argument of what counts as you dealing the “final blow” or if the actions you take lead to the death of your opponent are you not the killer as your actions led to his death and then blaha blah does summoned creature count as you blah blah blah you get it…
being pedantic about how dealt the final blow and what counts as "killing" and blah blah is one thing
this is something completely different, this is on a whole ******* other level, because there is absolutely no cause and effect between what you did and how the fighter died, no link whatsoever. If the fighter died fighting a demon, and you were the one who both summoned the demon to the material plane and instructed it to attack the fighter, then what you did caused the fighter to die in some sense, or at least it helped. If you dealt a bunch of damage to him with spells and then he fell of a cliff/ died activating a ability, well at least you helped soften him up and hasten his demise.
But here the wizard had absolutely no hand to play in killing the fighter. Would a jury to investigate the death of the fighter they would find the wizard innocent not becuase he is so good at hiding evidence or becuase he had his goons do the dirtywork but becuase he is genuinely innocent.
Not to mention how for an outside observer, this would not look like either an deathmatch or an death match, for whatever distinction you have between those terms. This would look like someone started a deathmatch, one participant ran away and hid somewhere and then only came out of hiding once the other had already died. And that's becuase at that is exactly what it is.
Think of killing someone like a group project.
If the wizard summoned the demon and the demon did it, then the wizard did his part since without him the demon would not be in the proximity to the wizard
if the wizard ran away and the grim reaper of age claimed the fighter, then age should get all the credit because age was the only thing that contributed to the fighter's death
Answer: Wow I was surprisingly close for just memory other than that when you think about how realistic is to have enough gunpowder to kill a like at least 160hp wizard with just what you can muster of gunpowder. But let’s say for the sake of fun the fighter has like twenty powder kegs (worth around 5000gp/over of price range but eh) and he gets his turn (starting out hold his weapon and a free hand) he closes the distance between and drops the kegs (no action required) then throws a candle/lantern (object interaction) into the kegs to ignite them then for the rest of the turn say swing at the wizard. Ok now you have 20 kegs exploding each dealing 7d6 fire damage with a DC of 12 and assuming the wizard doesn’t have resilient (Dex) as having it would mean along with a 20 Dex he would auto succeed every Dex save and half all the damage twice (due to absorb elements). 7d6 averages out to 24.5 damage, and having a DC of 12 means that anything below a 7 fails for the wizard so he has a 30% chance to fail the check sound we apply that chance to the 20 kegs we get he would fail 6 of the kegs. But nonetheless the wizard casts absorb elements gaining resistance to fire. So we have 6 kegs that are halved, and 14 kegs that are quartered in damage. A halved keg deals 12.25 fire damage while a quartered deals 6.125 fire damage. So 6 x 12.25 = 73.5, while 14 x 6.125 = 85.75, for a total of 159.25 fire damage for twenty kegs
have you forgotten that optimization is a thing that exists?
obviously this would not be an ordinary fighters using his hands to manually ignite stuff like an absolute pleb, this fighter would be an eldrich knight who is using archery as their fighting style with the lucky feat, matrial adept (quick toss), metamagic adept and maybe some other stuff
Using the net first to possibly restrain the wizard, giving them disadvantage on the dexterity saving throw. We can use our bonus action to do this (quick toss), and then use our action surge to do this again, while utilizing the lucky feat to turn the disadvantage we always have using the net into ultra advantage.
then we cast fireball, a spell that can ignite all the kegs of gunpowder while also dealing a fair bit of damage by itself, since we have a spare metamagic feat to go around we could even grab transmuting spell and turn this damage to cold damage or something that isnin't fire damage so it cannot be absorbed by absorb elements. Oh and conveniently the eldrich strike feature would have given you disadvantage on the dex save against ColdBall even if being hit by a net did not already do that.
(and before you say anything about the net being destroyed by the fireball, nothing says it has to be made out of flammable materials)
oh yeah and another thing we can do? we could try to use shocking grasp on you, thus completely denying the opportunity to use absorb elements in the first place. This would deny one of our attempts to catch you in a net, but it would be worth it for doubling the damage dealt on a hit, we could even attack with our eyes closed to get an extra bit of accuracy out of the lucky feat if the wizard did not decide to be an mountain dwarf armor build. (since you choose what dice to use with the lucky feat, you are more accurate if you have disadvantage and spend a luck point than if you don't have disadvantage and spend a luck point, you get to choose which of the 3 dice to use, you become more accurate with your eyes closed) (something i guess could be used against this build as it assumed that having disadvantage on your many saving throws is bad, something that it simply isn't always thanks to that one OP feat, but then again singe the fighter has the feat he could disable your uses, but then again so could you? Maybe i would need a way to negate the disadvantage for the net with Gunner or sharpshooter or something)
and if a monk manage to somehow set up a way to use stunning strike on you before igniting the kegs? well that means both making any kind of attempt at a dexterity saving throw and no way for them to cast absorb elements. Something that might be possible with a sun soul monk attacking you before hitting ya' with some burning hands. But at that point you are putting all your faith into those two con saves and those two attack rolls, as a non-incapacitated wizard might try to counterspell your very visible spell
edit: just remembered it's one metamagic per spell, ****
If the wizard has polymorph the fighter is going down in a slugfest....as they can literally change into a giant ape and beat the fighter into submission.
Man I would hate to have to fight a wizard with 2 levels of fighter though....action surge on a wizard is crazy good.
If the wizard has polymorph the fighter is going down in a slugfest....as they can literally change into a giant ape and beat the fighter into submission.
Man I would hate to have to fight a wizard with 2 levels of fighter though....action surge on a wizard is crazy good.
If the wizard has polymorph the fighter is going down in a slugfest....as they can literally change into a giant ape and beat the fighter into submission.
Answer: Yeah Polymorph is strong but the samurai might be able to still win… maybe since if the wizard keeps using Polymorph the samurai probably can’t punch through that amount of hp. Also just saying the wizard has invulnerability and other such spells so yeah it’s a tough time for the fighter.
Man I would hate to have to fight a wizard with 2 levels of fighter though....action surge on a wizard is crazy good.
Answer: Now imagine if you cast simulacrum via wish now you can cast three spells one additional one from your Action surge then two from your simulacrum (action + action surge). And now you also have double the reactions and if say your a Divination or Chronurgist wizard you practically get double the uses of your subclass features.
“I wish, desire, and long for my current target to die forever, and for this desire to be realized without being unduly complicated, or being unduly altered against my wish.”
Ok. If you don't think that Stress does not make your life "unduly complicated" I think perhaps you're having a problem with comprehension of the English language.
being pedantic about how dealt the final blow and what counts as "killing" and blah blah is one thing
this is something completely different, this is on a whole ****ing other level, because there is absolutely no cause and effect between what you did and how the fighter died, no link whatsoever. If the fighter died fighting a demon, and you were the one who both summoned the demon to the material plane and instructed it to attack the fighter, then what you did caused the fighter to die in some sense, or at least it helped. If you dealt a bunch of damage to him with spells and then he fell of a cliff/ died activating a ability, well at least you helped soften him up and hasten his demise.
But here the wizard had absolutely no hand to play in killing the fighter. Would a jury to investigate the death of the fighter they would find the wizard innocent not becuase he is so good at hiding evidence or becuase he had his goons do the dirtywork but becuase he is genuinely innocent.
Not to mention how for an outside observer, this would not look like either an deathmatch or an death match, for whatever distinction you have between those terms. This would look like someone started a deathmatch, one participant ran away and hid somewhere and then only came out of hiding once the other had already died. And that's becuase at that is exactly what it is.
Answer: We’ll first thing first does the action of me leaving the immediate battlefield making so the fighter cannot fight me and therefore die not an action that leads to his (the fighters) death. While I do get what you mean there is what I just said where in fact the action of moving away from the fighter to such a degree means the fighters death… as for the death-match distinct it is quite valid since like are we doing a match to the death (death match: first to die loses), or a deathmatch (where the first to be killed loses?).
Another way of looking at it is the wizard leaving the fighter to die as that’s the only thing the fighter can do in such a situation.
Additionally, the wizard doesn’t even need the fighter to die of age the wizard only needs the fighter to be on his death bed (unable to do anything but slowly wither away). Just realized the wizard doesn’t even need to wait for the fighter to die of age because in this whiteroom scenario the fighter only has a certain amount of available rations. Oh and also the wizard could do harassing or kiting strategies to make sure the fighter uses up all his hit die and can’t take a long rest so the wizard could just chip away the fighter especially say by sending summoned minions to consistently harass the fighter so he uses energy, can’t sleep, and just is slowly dying unable to do anything about it.
Think of killing someone like a group project.
Answer: Bahahaha now that is funny.
If the wizard summoned the demon and the demon did it, then the wizard did his part since without him the demon would not be in the proximity to the wizard
if the wizard ran away and the grim reaper of age claimed the fighter, then age should get all the credit because age was the only thing that contributed to the fighter's death
Answer: See above
have you forgotten that optimization is a thing that exists?
Answer: No… I just wanted to give a raw interpretation of what could have I wasn’t aiming for a build just trying to show what a build like that could accomplish damage wise. Then you gave this:
obviously this would not be an ordinary fighters using his hands to manually ignite stuff like an absolute pleb, this fighter would be an eldrich knight who is using archery as their fighting style with the lucky feat, matrial adept (quick toss), metamagic adept and maybe some other stuff
Using the net first to possibly restrain the wizard, giving them disadvantage on the dexterity saving throw. We can use our bonus action to do this (quick toss), and then use our action surge to do this again, while utilizing the lucky feat to turn the disadvantage we always have using the net into ultra advantage.
Answer: 1: You cannot you lucky multiple times on the same roll, 2: Lucky gives you a reroll not advantage, 3. If an attack is at disadvantage it can never be at advantage only a normal roll, 4: What’s ultra advantage because the closet thing to ultra is Elven Accuracy and you don’t have and even if you did it would help with getting triple advantage as your attack is at disadvantage.
then we cast fireball, a spell that can ignite all the kegs of gunpowder while also dealing a fair bit of damage by itself, since we have a spare metamagic feat to go around we could even grab transmuting spell and turn this damage to cold damage or something that isnin't fire damage so it cannot be absorbed by absorb elements.
Answer: Absorb elements protects against acid, cold, fire, lightning, and thunder damage. While transmuted Spell has the same damage types as absorb elements except that it has the addition of poison. Just saying if you were to use transmuted spell for poison that means the poisonball could be countered but then again even if you were to use subtle spell fireball still has a material component so you would need to obscure the material component but then you would have to have a way to obscure the component probably using an object interaction to do so but since if you were to use that here you would have your object interaction for the other parts of your strategy.
Additionally, if you were to change the fireball from being a fireball it would almost undoubtedly mean that fireball wouldn’t ignite the kegs. Kegs also are cumbersome weighing 20 pounds so their is the carrying problem of can you even do it especially with all of your other gear.
Oh and conveniently the eldrich strike feature would have given you disadvantage on the dex save against ColdBall even if being hit by a net did not already do that.
(and before you say anything about the net being destroyed by the fireball, nothing says it has to be made out of flammable materials)
Answer: For Eldritch Strike to trigger means that you need to hit with the net that uses strength to throw and that goes into the thing of like what are your stats since right now you need to be able to haul many pounds of gunpowder in large kegs, throw a net, cast spells, and maybe even deal some weapon damage.
oh yeah and another thing we can do? we could try to use shocking grasp on you, thus completely denying the opportunity to use absorb elements in the first place.
Answer: so Action shocking grasp, Action surge fire ball, bonus action quick toss net, dropping kegs, object interaction something? You doing a lot of stuff I recommend trying to put it into a like turn of what your doing so we can if it works.
This would deny one of our attempts to catch you in a net, but it would be worth it for doubling the damage dealt on a hit, we could even attack with our eyes closed to get an extra bit of accuracy out of the lucky feat if the wizard did not decide to be an mountain dwarf armor build. (since you choose what dice to use with the lucky feat, you are more accurate if you have disadvantage and spend a luck point than if you don't have disadvantage and spend a luck point, you get to choose which of the 3 dice to use, you become more accurate with your eyes closed) (something i guess could be used against this build as it assumed that having disadvantage on your many saving throws is bad, something that it simply isn't always thanks to that one OP feat, but then again singe the fighter has the feat he could disable your uses, but then again so could you? Maybe i would need a way to negate the disadvantage for the net with Gunner or sharpshooter or something)
Answer: No just no… when you have disadvantage and use Lucky your not more accurate your less. Let’s say you have to options: 1. You roll with disadvantage taking the lower roll then use Lucky to reroll the lower roll. 2. OR you roll normally then see if you fail then use Lucky. Where in those scenarios are you more accurate… the latter one (number 2) not number one. Tbh I have no clue what else your trying say for the rest of that…
and if a monk manage to somehow set up a way to use stunning strike on you before igniting the kegs? well that means both making any kind of attempt at a dexterity saving throw and no way for them to cast absorb elements.
Answer: Can a monk even carry those kegs like at all…
Something that might be possible with a sun soul monk attacking you before hitting ya' with some burning hands. But at that point you are putting all your faith into those two con saves and those two attack rolls, as a non-incapacitated wizard might try to counterspell your very visible spell
Answer: Um you can’t use stunning strike on the sun beam attacks they are ranged Spell attacks… stunning strike requires melee weapon attacks…
edit: just remembered it's one metamagic per spell, ****
Answer: yeeeeeaaahh…
P.S: Time for a “new” wizard strategy. The wizard grabs a staff (acts both as a quarter staff and arcane focus), polearm master, and war caster so when the foe enters your reach you can cast a spell against the target like Force cage or something that just stops the foe from having their turn.
Do tell if I missed something or misunderstood something it’s much appreciated.
“I wish, desire, and long for my current target to die forever, and for this desire to be realized without being unduly complicated, or being unduly altered against my wish.”
Ok. If you don't think that Stress does not make your life "unduly complicated" I think perhaps you're having a problem with comprehension of the English language.
Still having fun here. Next?
Answer: Do you know what unduly means? Its meaning is along the lines of being unwarranted… now is stress (the thing you know that’s apart of the spell) unwarranted… I’ll give you a tip it’s not.
And when did I say ”Stress does not make your life "unduly complicated" because sure the stress may “complicate” your life but we’re talking about the wish and not the wizards life and does the stress complicate my wish… no it does not nor does it change my wish or introduce any complications into what I wished for so your just wrong…
I'm perfectly and entirely correct by the rules. Any Wish not on the list causes Stress. How much that complicates your life is a matter that whatever grants the wish gets to decide, not you, so boom. No Wish.
You misspelled a word You bolded "apart" when you meant "a part".
Answer: You just saying so doesn’t mean you are by any means actually correct.
Any Wish not on the list causes Stress.
Answer: Yes any wish that is not the replication of a spell 8th or lower causes stress.
How much that complicates your life is a matter that whatever grants the wish gets to decide, not you, so boom. No Wish.
Answer: Did you just agree that it complicates my life and not my wish… well thanks you just proved my point. Additionally, also how does the stress “complicating” my life somehow make my wish not work because then again as I say the stress may be “complicating” my life but as the stress is a part of the wish spell and the stress is not changing, messing with or alter my “desire and longing” it is therefore not “unduly complicating” my wish therefore your still wrong.
You misspelled a word You bolded "apart" when you meant "a part".
Next?
Answer: So… thanks? also no need for the “Next.”
P.S: Newest version of my wish is now:
”I wish, desire, and long for my current target to die forever, and for this desire and longing to be realized without being unduly complicated, or being unduly altered against my wish.”
The change is the addition of “and longing” after “for this desire” because I wanted some added clarity and uniformity to the sentence.
This post has potentially manipulated dice roll results.
P.S: Newest version of my wish is now:
”I wish, desire, and long for my current target to die forever, and for this desire and longing to be realized without being unduly complicated, or being unduly altered against my wish.”
As a DM I would look at you and go, " You sure that's how to want to phrase that? "
And I will for this scenario, take it you say yes.
at which point, { and this is in no way knocking or trying to undermine what the debate about all this is about, just my interpretation of how it see it will transpire, and to be honest it's funny to read how the wish debate has progressed }, I would inform that you have gained stress per understanding of the rules regarding the functionality of the WISH spell, as this is NOT a use of the duplication of a spell portion. As per the penalty of said stress, your current Strength Ability Score is now 3 for the next 4 days. The ability to cast wish again is 81: { if less than 33, wish lost forever }.
As for the outcome of your wish, it will be as follows: "You point to the fighter and make your wish. The fighter looks at you and begins to cry. The fighter starts to mutter under his breath and though the sobs about how he just stood there watching people die. On and on this goes. minutes, hours, days, never ending NEVER."
Now I'm sure your about to say, " That wasn't what i meant, and doesn't conform to my wish."
Thing is, you never defined the word "die", and it still holds true to the " desire and longing to be realized without being unduly complicated, or being unduly altered against my wish " wording you tried to use.
Any other DM, might have broken the wording apart, and completely twisted it as to show that no matter the context and phrasing, and the latitude that is given in the interpretation of the wording, what you get is not what you were expecting.
MaximusCathril I’m genuinely curious on how you brought our self to to make the ”I wish, desire, and long for my current target to die forever, and for this desire and longing to be realized without being unduly complicated, or being unduly altered against my wish.” turn into the fighter talking about death using the wish as the basis for such an action (talk of death) since such no interpretation can be logically made from the words of my wish.
Sorry if that sounded… angry? I just wanna say I genuinely want to know how you came to conjure up such an interpretation (if it can even be done) as personally for how the wish is worded as of now I don’t see how such and an interpretation can taken from the wish using the words given of “for my current target to die forever” and the interpretation be the fighter endlessly talking of death.
Additionally, if your gripe is with the “my current target to die forever” part that part can be changed up for anything like “my current target to physically age up past their max lifespan dying while doing so” or things like that or just literally changing the word for die to like “my current target to disintegrate forever” or you could just say “my current target to be entirely erased from existence from now on till the end of time” or something like these you get the point.
P.S: Just saying as for how my wish is technically worded the “my current target to die forever” can easily be replaced with whatever you want like say “my current target being myself become a lich that…” or something like that so you get the point but for ease I’ll print out the “new” wish:
”I wish, desire, and long for (Insert the wish/desire/longing you want), and for this desire and longing to be realized without being unduly complicated, or being unduly altered against my wish.”
Side Note via Edit: Just thought about it but I guess in a way it could be argued that dying isn’t specific enough as it could be said that yes that fighter “died” but in fact he experienced permanent spiritual death instead of physical death or soul death (destruction of a soul) or something like that anyway just a thought.
As for my my interpretation of the word "die", check out the different ways the word is defined. I picked one that seemed contextualized to the wording of your wish.
The whole fighter talking about death thing, that could come from his character flaw. Having been witness to a massacre wilst doing nothing to stop it, or the like. { something that triggered the "die" emotion }
it's nothing more than my point of view as to how the wish spell would work. If one is using it for anything other than to cast another spell 8th level or lower, then the realization that their wording may be twisted in ways unforeseen, might force a deeper consideration in the use of the spell
MaximusCathril thanks for the clarification it helped a lot. And I see that now especially (if you saw my “Side Note via Edit on my previous post) considering yeah without added clarification “die” might as well be misconstrued for any of it’s other meanings (even if the “die” is heavily favouring a certain variation) or even put into different “contexts” (closest word I could think of to the word I want) like die could mean a different not in just a synonym way but in different proverbial ways unless it is forced into a certain variation like “physically die” where the meaning of die must mean well… physically death and not some other variation. This becomes even more clear when you take in account what I spoke of earlier (in my “Side Note via Edit) as like die doesn’t always meaning physical death or your soul dying it could mean that certain concepts of ones character or personality “die” making that concept disappear. So in conclusion I guess what would be more appropriate would be “physical death” or a word change like what I wrote before.
So you want the wish to keep them alive forever, because from the moment we are born, we are dying, and if they actually stop living, then it's not forever.
you made so many misstakes that i do not have the time to cover them all in great deatail but like:
- igniting flammable objects in the spell's area is an thing that is written and hard-coded into the description of fireball/ burning hands. It is not an inherent property of fire damage. Thus changing the damage type of the spell would still be able to let the gunpowder be lit ablaze (does not make much sense but it is indeed how the spells are supposed to work)
- sun soul monks don't loose the abillity to use their hands at 3rd level, i was assuming that they spent the attack action making two unarmed strikes with stunning strike, ya' know like a normal person/ monk would. The fact they have the option of making special ranged spell attacks is not relevant, only the fact that they can use an bonus action to cast burning hands after using the attack action on their turn and that burning hands ignites flammable objects in the area
- absob elements gives you resistance to the triggering damage type. That means that a single casting of absorb elements cannot protect you from both cold damage and fire damage, only one or the other
- the wording for lucky is that you "roll an additional d20 and choose which dice to use". When you roll with disadvantage you roll two dice and usually you take the lower roll, but becuase now you can choose the dice it essentially becomes the best of three different rolls. Yes it is absolutely elven accuracy- style "roll thrice and use the highest" i mean when i say "ultra advantage".
- i thought we assumed simply dropping the explosive barrels was a free action (since no longer holding a large stack of barrels/ releasing your grasp of them does not really seem like something that should be a significant time investment)? That means we spend out bonus action to yeet a net, get one action to cast (subtle) shocking grasp on our turn, and lastly use our action surge to cast a subtle fireball, or heck if the shocking grasp spell hits the wizard we don't even need to do that, we can cast a non-silent but transmuted fireball since the wizard does not have a reaction to work with anymore and thus cannot use counterspell. That is pretty much the turn i imagined. Two actions and a bonus action (and all 2 of our sorcery points), there ya' go
- also note the wizard's lack of options in this scenario, since this is indeed a absolute no-prep whiteroom beyond having had the time to prepare spells, no mage armor is available for the wizard (action to cast). And since you would want to use your reaction to cast either counterspell or absorb elements later you cannot use the shield spell to protect yourself against attacks either (or well you can but you'd be crippling yourself in doing so). Against the monk, the wizard would probably like to have both resilience (dex) and resilience (con), and lucky, and be an divination wizard for some slight extra control
- also note that some kind of bugbear, goliath or orc with like a decent 12 str could probably handle the weight, or at least enough for 18 barrels (less than 20, still probably enough to cook a wizard at an average of 441 points of fire damage assuming all failed saves and no resistance, something that would happen if the wizard managed to get stunned)
So the wizard gets no prep but the monk or fighter gets to acquire all these barrels of rare substance?
OFC if you give the fighter/monk a huge advantage and take away prep time for the wizard you will have a fight that is tipped in the monk/fighters favor....that they will easily lose if they do not win initiative.
To say a level 20 wizard will not be at all prepared for literally anything for the day is the whitest of white rooms.....Looking at what preparations a Level 20 wizard has made in the books its scary....
Halastar has literally made a dungeon that kills high level adventurers on the regular....its in their bag to be ready for anything and taking that away is like taking stunning strike away from monk.
you made so many misstakes that i do not have the time to cover them all in great deatail but like:
Answer: Ok let’s see…
- igniting flammable objects in the spell's area is an thing that is written and hard-coded into the description of fireball/ burning hands. It is not an inherent property of fire damage. Thus changing the damage type of the spell would still be able to let the gunpowder be lit ablaze (does not make much sense but it is indeed how the spells are supposed to work)
Answer: Well transmuting fireball sure since it has the igniting objects in a different sentence but with burning hands having ”The fire ignites any flammable objects in the area that aren't being worn or carried“ yeeeaah… since if you were to change this it wouldn’t be fire damage and therefore couldn’t ignite the objects.
- sun soul monks don't loose the abillity to use their hands at 3rd level, i was assuming that they spent the attack action making two unarmed strikes with stunning strike, ya' know like a normal person/ monk would. The fact they have the option of making special ranged spell attacks is not relevant, only the fact that they can use an bonus action to cast burning hands after using the attack action on their turn and that burning hands ignites flammable objects in the area
Answer: So action two unarmed strikes, bonus action burning hands. So I guess you need to hit the wizard then the wizard to fail the stunning strike… and as said the wizard hit a pretty good chance of success and if you don’t stun the wizard your burning hands is counterspelled.
- absob elements gives you resistance to the triggering damage type. That means that a single casting of absorb elements cannot protect you from both cold damage and fire damage, only one or the other
Answer: Yep and I never said that it did.
- the wording for lucky is that you "roll an additional d20 and choose which dice to use". When you roll with disadvantage you roll two dice and usually you take the lower roll, but becuase now you can choose the dice it essentially becomes the best of three different rolls. Yes it is absolutely elven accuracy- style "roll thrice and use the highest" i mean when i say "ultra advantage".
Answer: No just no… how did you get to this conclusion I’m so confused like actually your just wrong. Ok you have two scenarios:
1. You roll with disadvantage. You roll 2d20’s getting a 5 and a 15 and take the 5 as your roll. Now you use lucky since you want a better roll rolling a 10
2 You roll normally. You roll a d20 getting a 10 and take the 10 as your roll. Now you use lucky since you want a better roll rolling a 15.
Of course these rolls would not happen but it’s to prove a point. So what I’m saying is that would you rather choose to have a disadvantage dice and a normal die (lucky) OR a normal dice and a normal dice to have better odds. Now if your sane you would choose the 2 normal dice choosing the highest since it would be akin to advantage while the other would be a choosing the lowest of two dice and a normal roll.
So ArtificeMeal when I’m the world did you get this “TRipLE AdVaNTagE” you speak of since it doesn’t exist.
- i thought we assumed simply dropping the explosive barrels was a free action (since no longer holding a large stack of barrels/ releasing your grasp of them does not really seem like something that should be a significant time investment)? That means we spend out bonus action to yeet a net, get one action to cast (subtle) shocking grasp on our turn, and lastly use our action surge to cast a subtle fireball, or heck if the shocking grasp spell hits the wizard we don't even need to do that, we can cast a non-silent but transmuted fireball since the wizard does not have a reaction to work with anymore and thus cannot use counterspell. That is pretty much the turn i imagined. Two actions and a bonus action (and all 2 of our sorcery points), there ya' go
Answer: If in your scenario the wizard can’t use a reaction what’s the point of transmuting the spell since the wizard couldn’t absorb elements in the first place.
Just saying if the wizard was a tiefling having fire resistance he’d much better off against this “strategy” or say just having 20 Dex and resilient Dex for proficiency in Dex saving throws so even if he were to roll a 1 on the Dex saves of every keg because he would have a +11 bonus he would succeed every leg for quartered damage (with tiefling resistance).
- also note the wizard's lack of options in this scenario, since this is indeed a absolute no-prep whiteroom beyond having had the time to prepare spells, no mage armor is available for the wizard (action to cast). And since you would want to use your reaction to cast either counterspell or absorb elements later you cannot use the shield spell to protect yourself against attacks either (or well you can but you'd be crippling yourself in doing so).
Answer: Mage armor is allowed due to very early in the discussion where mage armor was compare to the wearing of armor and the equivalent being the wizard being able to cast mage armor if they wanted to so yes mage armor is allowed that why it was included in like all AC calculations.
Against the monk, the wizard would probably like to have both resilience (dex) and resilience (con), and lucky, and be an divination wizard for some slight extra control
Answer: You can’t repeat feats unless the feat says so resilience doesn’t allow repetition.
- also note that some kind of bugbear, goliath or orc with like a decent 12 str could probably handle the weight, or at least enough for 18 barrels (less than 20, still probably enough to cook a wizard at an average of 441 points of fire damage assuming all failed saves and no resistance, something that would happen if the wizard managed to get stunned)
Answer: Sure maybe you could handle the weight but mind if you haven’t noticed that:
1. No class has ether the physical space to actually hold all of these kegs or the weight capacity to do so.
2. No class can muster enough gold to even get two of these kegs as each one costs 250 gold pieces.
So this strategy can’t even be used in the first place… and even if it somehow was implemented (it can’t) the wizard would the get the appropriate amount of money also and he could probably buy some nice things with that like 5000 gold probably even magic items… well that entire conversation was fun… I guess considering that you can’t even buy any amount of the kegs for it to warrant actually making a build about it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Ok I had this thought so instead of just you know winning like the wizard could do what could the wizard do if he wanted a slugging match instead of the I win if I have a turn thing. Say the wizard goes first I think the first thing he would do is wish… for a simulacrum and depending on his opponent if they are ether ranged or melee they simulacrum would cast the appropriate spell if ranged probably something along the line of warding wind or up casted invisibility, warding wind or some type of ward, wall, or distance making spell while if melee an 4th level fly for both wizards would be most appropriate to get out of range. So as for melee your kinda just screw as you can’t do anything against the wizard who’s to far away. So most builds should be ranged builds.
But yeah how would you think a slugging match would go between a fighter and wizard?
If the wizard has polymorph the fighter is going down in a slugfest....as they can literally change into a giant ape and beat the fighter into submission.
Man I would hate to have to fight a wizard with 2 levels of fighter though....action surge on a wizard is crazy good.
Answer: Well me and Geann had a this thing where he was like “but what are you wishing to?” and I was like “the cosmos as that is were the wizard draws his power from so the cosmos?” then he made the wish with the beginning part and now we are here I guess.
If you look at the beginning description of the wizard it says ”Drawing on the subtle weave of magic that permeates the cosmos“ so yeah I guess it’s the cosmos in a way and the magical weave in the other so yeah.
“Wish must be realized without any complications or unduly alterations” that is what it means… and when I think about it do you even need the and/or since or works perfectly fine in this context even without the “and” part.
Answer: How would you end and as for the “following words” thing I could just get rid of the previous thing to be:
“I wish, desire, and long for my current target to die forever, and for this desire to be realized without being unduly complicated, or being unduly altered against my wish.”
This one seems really good wish wise although as for the last bit it could use some revisions perhaps.
Answer: See above
Answer: I bet that with enough revision and such you could make a phrase to make the wish only be able to make the wish succeed or fail. As for genocide who cares for that if you win…
being pedantic about how dealt the final blow and what counts as "killing" and blah blah is one thing
this is something completely different, this is on a whole ******* other level, because there is absolutely no cause and effect between what you did and how the fighter died, no link whatsoever. If the fighter died fighting a demon, and you were the one who both summoned the demon to the material plane and instructed it to attack the fighter, then what you did caused the fighter to die in some sense, or at least it helped. If you dealt a bunch of damage to him with spells and then he fell of a cliff/ died activating a ability, well at least you helped soften him up and hasten his demise.
But here the wizard had absolutely no hand to play in killing the fighter. Would a jury to investigate the death of the fighter they would find the wizard innocent not becuase he is so good at hiding evidence or becuase he had his goons do the dirtywork but becuase he is genuinely innocent.
Not to mention how for an outside observer, this would not look like either an deathmatch or an death match, for whatever distinction you have between those terms. This would look like someone started a deathmatch, one participant ran away and hid somewhere and then only came out of hiding once the other had already died. And that's becuase at that is exactly what it is.
Think of killing someone like a group project.
If the wizard summoned the demon and the demon did it, then the wizard did his part since without him the demon would not be in the proximity to the wizard
if the wizard ran away and the grim reaper of age claimed the fighter, then age should get all the credit because age was the only thing that contributed to the fighter's death
have you forgotten that optimization is a thing that exists?
obviously this would not be an ordinary fighters using his hands to manually ignite stuff like an absolute pleb, this fighter would be an eldrich knight who is using archery as their fighting style with the lucky feat, matrial adept (quick toss), metamagic adept and maybe some other stuff
Using the net first to possibly restrain the wizard, giving them disadvantage on the dexterity saving throw. We can use our bonus action to do this (quick toss), and then use our action surge to do this again, while utilizing the lucky feat to turn the disadvantage we always have using the net into ultra advantage.
then we cast fireball, a spell that can ignite all the kegs of gunpowder while also dealing a fair bit of damage by itself, since we have a spare metamagic feat to go around we could even grab transmuting spell and turn this damage to cold damage or something that isnin't fire damage so it cannot be absorbed by absorb elements. Oh and conveniently the eldrich strike feature would have given you disadvantage on the dex save against ColdBall even if being hit by a net did not already do that.
(and before you say anything about the net being destroyed by the fireball, nothing says it has to be made out of flammable materials)
oh yeah and another thing we can do? we could try to use shocking grasp on you, thus completely denying the opportunity to use absorb elements in the first place. This would deny one of our attempts to catch you in a net, but it would be worth it for doubling the damage dealt on a hit, we could even attack with our eyes closed to get an extra bit of accuracy out of the lucky feat if the wizard did not decide to be an mountain dwarf armor build. (since you choose what dice to use with the lucky feat, you are more accurate if you have disadvantage and spend a luck point than if you don't have disadvantage and spend a luck point, you get to choose which of the 3 dice to use, you become more accurate with your eyes closed)
(something i guess could be used against this build as it assumed that having disadvantage on your many saving throws is bad, something that it simply isn't always thanks to that one OP feat, but then again singe the fighter has the feat he could disable your uses, but then again so could you? Maybe i would need a way to negate the disadvantage for the net with Gunner or sharpshooter or something)
and if a monk manage to somehow set up a way to use stunning strike on you before igniting the kegs? well that means both making any kind of attempt at a dexterity saving throw and no way for them to cast absorb elements. Something that might be possible with a sun soul monk attacking you before hitting ya' with some burning hands. But at that point you are putting all your faith into those two con saves and those two attack rolls, as a non-incapacitated wizard might try to counterspell your very visible spell
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
shapechange and true polymorph are different and here that difference is very important
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
Yeah shapchange would be crazy good with Action Surge to really set yourself up.
Answer: Yeah Polymorph is strong but the samurai might be able to still win… maybe since if the wizard keeps using Polymorph the samurai probably can’t punch through that amount of hp. Also just saying the wizard has invulnerability and other such spells so yeah it’s a tough time for the fighter.
Answer: Now imagine if you cast simulacrum via wish now you can cast three spells one additional one from your Action surge then two from your simulacrum (action + action surge). And now you also have double the reactions and if say your a Divination or Chronurgist wizard you practically get double the uses of your subclass features.
“I wish, desire, and long for my current target to die forever, and for this desire to be realized without being unduly complicated, or being unduly altered against my wish.”
Ok. If you don't think that Stress does not make your life "unduly complicated" I think perhaps you're having a problem with comprehension of the English language.
Still having fun here. Next?
<Insert clever signature here>
Answer: We’ll first thing first does the action of me leaving the immediate battlefield making so the fighter cannot fight me and therefore die not an action that leads to his (the fighters) death. While I do get what you mean there is what I just said where in fact the action of moving away from the fighter to such a degree means the fighters death… as for the death-match distinct it is quite valid since like are we doing a match to the death (death match: first to die loses), or a deathmatch (where the first to be killed loses?).
Another way of looking at it is the wizard leaving the fighter to die as that’s the only thing the fighter can do in such a situation.
Additionally, the wizard doesn’t even need the fighter to die of age the wizard only needs the fighter to be on his death bed (unable to do anything but slowly wither away).
Just realized the wizard doesn’t even need to wait for the fighter to die of age because in this whiteroom scenario the fighter only has a certain amount of available rations. Oh and also the wizard could do harassing or kiting strategies to make sure the fighter uses up all his hit die and can’t take a long rest so the wizard could just chip away the fighter especially say by sending summoned minions to consistently harass the fighter so he uses energy, can’t sleep, and just is slowly dying unable to do anything about it.
Answer: Bahahaha now that is funny.
Answer: See above
Answer: No… I just wanted to give a raw interpretation of what could have I wasn’t aiming for a build just trying to show what a build like that could accomplish damage wise. Then you gave this:
Answer: 1: You cannot you lucky multiple times on the same roll, 2: Lucky gives you a reroll not advantage, 3. If an attack is at disadvantage it can never be at advantage only a normal roll, 4: What’s ultra advantage because the closet thing to ultra is Elven Accuracy and you don’t have and even if you did it would help with getting triple advantage as your attack is at disadvantage.
Answer: Absorb elements protects against acid, cold, fire, lightning, and thunder damage. While transmuted Spell has the same damage types as absorb elements except that it has the addition of poison. Just saying if you were to use transmuted spell for poison that means the poisonball could be countered but then again even if you were to use subtle spell fireball still has a material component so you would need to obscure the material component but then you would have to have a way to obscure the component probably using an object interaction to do so but since if you were to use that here you would have your object interaction for the other parts of your strategy.
Additionally, if you were to change the fireball from being a fireball it would almost undoubtedly mean that fireball wouldn’t ignite the kegs. Kegs also are cumbersome weighing 20 pounds so their is the carrying problem of can you even do it especially with all of your other gear.
Answer: For Eldritch Strike to trigger means that you need to hit with the net that uses strength to throw and that goes into the thing of like what are your stats since right now you need to be able to haul many pounds of gunpowder in large kegs, throw a net, cast spells, and maybe even deal some weapon damage.
Answer: so Action shocking grasp, Action surge fire ball, bonus action quick toss net, dropping kegs, object interaction something? You doing a lot of stuff I recommend trying to put it into a like turn of what your doing so we can if it works.
Answer: No just no… when you have disadvantage and use Lucky your not more accurate your less. Let’s say you have to options:
1. You roll with disadvantage taking the lower roll then use Lucky to reroll the lower roll.
2. OR you roll normally then see if you fail then use Lucky.
Where in those scenarios are you more accurate… the latter one (number 2) not number one.
Tbh I have no clue what else your trying say for the rest of that…
Answer: Can a monk even carry those kegs like at all…
Answer: Um you can’t use stunning strike on the sun beam attacks they are ranged Spell attacks… stunning strike requires melee weapon attacks…
Answer: yeeeeeaaahh…
P.S: Time for a “new” wizard strategy. The wizard grabs a staff (acts both as a quarter staff and arcane focus), polearm master, and war caster so when the foe enters your reach you can cast a spell against the target like Force cage or something that just stops the foe from having their turn.
Do tell if I missed something or misunderstood something it’s much appreciated.
Answer: Do you know what unduly means? Its meaning is along the lines of being unwarranted… now is stress (the thing you know that’s apart of the spell) unwarranted… I’ll give you a tip it’s not.
And when did I say ”Stress does not make your life "unduly complicated" because sure the stress may “complicate” your life but we’re talking about the wish and not the wizards life and does the stress complicate my wish… no it does not nor does it change my wish or introduce any complications into what I wished for so your just wrong…
I'm perfectly and entirely correct by the rules. Any Wish not on the list causes Stress. How much that complicates your life is a matter that whatever grants the wish gets to decide, not you, so boom. No Wish.
You misspelled a word You bolded "apart" when you meant "a part".
Next?
<Insert clever signature here>
Answer: You just saying so doesn’t mean you are by any means actually correct.
Answer: Yes any wish that is not the replication of a spell 8th or lower causes stress.
Answer: Did you just agree that it complicates my life and not my wish… well thanks you just proved my point.
Additionally, also how does the stress “complicating” my life somehow make my wish not work because then again as I say the stress may be “complicating” my life but as the stress is a part of the wish spell and the stress is not changing, messing with or alter my “desire and longing” it is therefore not “unduly complicating” my wish therefore your still wrong.
Answer: So… thanks? also no need for the “Next.”
P.S: Newest version of my wish is now:
”I wish, desire, and long for my current target to die forever, and for this desire and longing to be realized without being unduly complicated, or being unduly altered against my wish.”
The change is the addition of “and longing” after “for this desire” because I wanted some added clarity and uniformity to the sentence.
As a DM I would look at you and go, " You sure that's how to want to phrase that? "
And I will for this scenario, take it you say yes.
at which point, { and this is in no way knocking or trying to undermine what the debate about all this is about, just my interpretation of how it see it will transpire, and to be honest it's funny to read how the wish debate has progressed }, I would inform that you have gained stress per understanding of the rules regarding the functionality of the WISH spell, as this is NOT a use of the duplication of a spell portion. As per the penalty of said stress, your current Strength Ability Score is now 3 for the next 4 days. The ability to cast wish again is 81: { if less than 33, wish lost forever }.
As for the outcome of your wish, it will be as follows: "You point to the fighter and make your wish. The fighter looks at you and begins to cry. The fighter starts to mutter under his breath and though the sobs about how he just stood there watching people die. On and on this goes. minutes, hours, days, never ending NEVER."
Now I'm sure your about to say, " That wasn't what i meant, and doesn't conform to my wish."
Thing is, you never defined the word "die", and it still holds true to the " desire and longing to be realized without being unduly complicated, or being unduly altered against my wish " wording you tried to use.
Any other DM, might have broken the wording apart, and completely twisted it as to show that no matter the context and phrasing, and the latitude that is given in the interpretation of the wording, what you get is not what you were expecting.
MaximusCathril I’m genuinely curious on how you brought our self to to make the ”I wish, desire, and long for my current target to die forever, and for this desire and longing to be realized without being unduly complicated, or being unduly altered against my wish.” turn into the fighter talking about death using the wish as the basis for such an action (talk of death) since such no interpretation can be logically made from the words of my wish.
Sorry if that sounded… angry? I just wanna say I genuinely want to know how you came to conjure up such an interpretation (if it can even be done) as personally for how the wish is worded as of now I don’t see how such and an interpretation can taken from the wish using the words given of “for my current target to die forever” and the interpretation be the fighter endlessly talking of death.
Additionally, if your gripe is with the “my current target to die forever” part that part can be changed up for anything like “my current target to physically age up past their max lifespan dying while doing so” or things like that or just literally changing the word for die to like “my current target to disintegrate forever” or you could just say “my current target to be entirely erased from existence from now on till the end of time” or something like these you get the point.
P.S: Just saying as for how my wish is technically worded the “my current target to die forever” can easily be replaced with whatever you want like say “my current target being myself become a lich that…” or something like that so you get the point but for ease I’ll print out the “new” wish:
”I wish, desire, and long for (Insert the wish/desire/longing you want), and for this desire and longing to be realized without being unduly complicated, or being unduly altered against my wish.”
Side Note via Edit: Just thought about it but I guess in a way it could be argued that dying isn’t specific enough as it could be said that yes that fighter “died” but in fact he experienced permanent spiritual death instead of physical death or soul death (destruction of a soul) or something like that anyway just a thought.
OH, no harm or foul done, and no hate intended.
As for my my interpretation of the word "die", check out the different ways the word is defined. I picked one that seemed contextualized to the wording of your wish.
The whole fighter talking about death thing, that could come from his character flaw. Having been witness to a massacre wilst doing nothing to stop it, or the like. { something that triggered the "die" emotion }
it's nothing more than my point of view as to how the wish spell would work. If one is using it for anything other than to cast another spell 8th level or lower, then the realization that their wording may be twisted in ways unforeseen, might force a deeper consideration in the use of the spell
MaximusCathril thanks for the clarification it helped a lot.
And I see that now especially (if you saw my “Side Note via Edit on my previous post) considering yeah without added clarification “die” might as well be misconstrued for any of it’s other meanings (even if the “die” is heavily favouring a certain variation) or even put into different “contexts” (closest word I could think of to the word I want) like die could mean a different not in just a synonym way but in different proverbial ways unless it is forced into a certain variation like “physically die” where the meaning of die must mean well… physically death and not some other variation.
This becomes even more clear when you take in account what I spoke of earlier (in my “Side Note via Edit) as like die doesn’t always meaning physical death or your soul dying it could mean that certain concepts of ones character or personality “die” making that concept disappear.
So in conclusion I guess what would be more appropriate would be “physical death” or a word change like what I wrote before.
So you want the wish to keep them alive forever, because from the moment we are born, we are dying, and if they actually stop living, then it's not forever.
Next?
<Insert clever signature here>
you made so many misstakes that i do not have the time to cover them all in great deatail but like:
- igniting flammable objects in the spell's area is an thing that is written and hard-coded into the description of fireball/ burning hands. It is not an inherent property of fire damage. Thus changing the damage type of the spell would still be able to let the gunpowder be lit ablaze (does not make much sense but it is indeed how the spells are supposed to work)
- sun soul monks don't loose the abillity to use their hands at 3rd level, i was assuming that they spent the attack action making two unarmed strikes with stunning strike, ya' know like a normal person/ monk would. The fact they have the option of making special ranged spell attacks is not relevant, only the fact that they can use an bonus action to cast burning hands after using the attack action on their turn and that burning hands ignites flammable objects in the area
- absob elements gives you resistance to the triggering damage type. That means that a single casting of absorb elements cannot protect you from both cold damage and fire damage, only one or the other
- the wording for lucky is that you "roll an additional d20 and choose which dice to use". When you roll with disadvantage you roll two dice and usually you take the lower roll, but becuase now you can choose the dice it essentially becomes the best of three different rolls. Yes it is absolutely elven accuracy- style "roll thrice and use the highest" i mean when i say "ultra advantage".
- i thought we assumed simply dropping the explosive barrels was a free action (since no longer holding a large stack of barrels/ releasing your grasp of them does not really seem like something that should be a significant time investment)? That means we spend out bonus action to yeet a net, get one action to cast (subtle) shocking grasp on our turn, and lastly use our action surge to cast a subtle fireball, or heck if the shocking grasp spell hits the wizard we don't even need to do that, we can cast a non-silent but transmuted fireball since the wizard does not have a reaction to work with anymore and thus cannot use counterspell. That is pretty much the turn i imagined. Two actions and a bonus action (and all 2 of our sorcery points), there ya' go
- also note the wizard's lack of options in this scenario, since this is indeed a absolute no-prep whiteroom beyond having had the time to prepare spells, no mage armor is available for the wizard (action to cast). And since you would want to use your reaction to cast either counterspell or absorb elements later you cannot use the shield spell to protect yourself against attacks either (or well you can but you'd be crippling yourself in doing so). Against the monk, the wizard would probably like to have both resilience (dex) and resilience (con), and lucky, and be an divination wizard for some slight extra control
- also note that some kind of bugbear, goliath or orc with like a decent 12 str could probably handle the weight, or at least enough for 18 barrels (less than 20, still probably enough to cook a wizard at an average of 441 points of fire damage assuming all failed saves and no resistance, something that would happen if the wizard managed to get stunned)
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
So the wizard gets no prep but the monk or fighter gets to acquire all these barrels of rare substance?
OFC if you give the fighter/monk a huge advantage and take away prep time for the wizard you will have a fight that is tipped in the monk/fighters favor....that they will easily lose if they do not win initiative.
To say a level 20 wizard will not be at all prepared for literally anything for the day is the whitest of white rooms.....Looking at what preparations a Level 20 wizard has made in the books its scary....
Halastar has literally made a dungeon that kills high level adventurers on the regular....its in their bag to be ready for anything and taking that away is like taking stunning strike away from monk.
Answer: Ok let’s see…
Answer: Well transmuting fireball sure since it has the igniting objects in a different sentence but with burning hands having ”The fire ignites any flammable objects in the area that aren't being worn or carried“ yeeeaah… since if you were to change this it wouldn’t be fire damage and therefore couldn’t ignite the objects.
Answer: So action two unarmed strikes, bonus action burning hands. So I guess you need to hit the wizard then the wizard to fail the stunning strike… and as said the wizard hit a pretty good chance of success and if you don’t stun the wizard your burning hands is counterspelled.
Answer: Yep and I never said that it did.
Answer: No just no… how did you get to this conclusion I’m so confused like actually your just wrong. Ok you have two scenarios:
1. You roll with disadvantage. You roll 2d20’s getting a 5 and a 15 and take the 5 as your roll. Now you use lucky since you want a better roll rolling a 10
2 You roll normally. You roll a d20 getting a 10 and take the 10 as your roll. Now you use lucky since you want a better roll rolling a 15.
Of course these rolls would not happen but it’s to prove a point. So what I’m saying is that would you rather choose to have a disadvantage dice and a normal die (lucky) OR a normal dice and a normal dice to have better odds. Now if your sane you would choose the 2 normal dice choosing the highest since it would be akin to advantage while the other would be a choosing the lowest of two dice and a normal roll.
So ArtificeMeal when I’m the world did you get this “TRipLE AdVaNTagE” you speak of since it doesn’t exist.
Answer: If in your scenario the wizard can’t use a reaction what’s the point of transmuting the spell since the wizard couldn’t absorb elements in the first place.
Just saying if the wizard was a tiefling having fire resistance he’d much better off against this “strategy” or say just having 20 Dex and resilient Dex for proficiency in Dex saving throws so even if he were to roll a 1 on the Dex saves of every keg because he would have a +11 bonus he would succeed every leg for quartered damage (with tiefling resistance).
Answer: Mage armor is allowed due to very early in the discussion where mage armor was compare to the wearing of armor and the equivalent being the wizard being able to cast mage armor if they wanted to so yes mage armor is allowed that why it was included in like all AC calculations.
Answer: You can’t repeat feats unless the feat says so resilience doesn’t allow repetition.
Answer: Sure maybe you could handle the weight but mind if you haven’t noticed that:
1. No class has ether the physical space to actually hold all of these kegs or the weight capacity to do so.
2. No class can muster enough gold to even get two of these kegs as each one costs 250 gold pieces.
So this strategy can’t even be used in the first place… and even if it somehow was implemented (it can’t) the wizard would the get the appropriate amount of money also and he could probably buy some nice things with that like 5000 gold probably even magic items… well that entire conversation was fun… I guess considering that you can’t even buy any amount of the kegs for it to warrant actually making a build about it.