ahdok 2d ago • 100%
alright, I'll send her over...
This is Konsi, she's a DnD cleric who just wants to help people, but who suffers from imposter syndrome. I'm currently drawing her daily for drawtober. ![](https://lemm.ee/api/v3/image_proxy?url=https%3A%2F%2Fttrpg.network%2Fpictrs%2Fimage%2F8a4b6bc7-7912-405e-ae1d-273068a2d985.jpeg) ![](https://lemm.ee/api/v3/image_proxy?url=https%3A%2F%2Fttrpg.network%2Fpictrs%2Fimage%2Fbb2d1953-b911-4a3b-bd82-36e327203ed7.jpeg) Hope you all enjoy!
ahdok 3d ago • 100%
Kyrzin's Ooze
ahdok 3d ago • 100%
This is very much a non-canon Konsi. Konsi would be a fuzzy/happy/sleepy drunk, rather than a grumpy drunk. Once she gets tipsy she just wants to snuggle.
Also, she's immune to all poisons.
ahdok 3d ago • 98%
As usual, have a bonus Konsi
This is how every party healer feels inside.
ahdok 1w ago • 100%
Yeah, it's ambiguous. I interpret the "you can be one foot taller or shorter" to mean you, and something like a hat or ridiculous hair can just be as large as you like so long as it still looks like an item of clothing and not (say) a billboard.
Of course, at very large sizes, something's going to clip into the illusion every now and then, so it'll obviously be an illusion to anyone who is around it for more than a few minutes. I'm imagining small birds trying to land on it and faceplanting into your head.
ahdok 1w ago • 100%
I suppose y'all can have a bonus Konsi, as a treat.
You can seem 1 foot shorter or taller and can appear heavier or lighter. You must adopt a form that has the same basic arrangement of limbs as you have. Otherwise, the extent of the illusion is up to you.
ahdok 2w ago • 100%
Okay, it should be working reasonably now, hopefully what we've done will be robust enough to take us to the server move.
ahdok 2w ago • 100%
We've been having server issues for a while, I know. The main culprit has been a massive increase in scraper bots that effectively serve as a DDOS on my site. Long term they should be solved by the upcoming server migration that's coming, but that's a long and slow process.
I think I have a stopgap solution this week that should get it up and working well... it's not cheap but I'm willing to put some money into making sure people can read the comics.
ahdok 2w ago • 100%
That depends how much experience you have, it's mini for some people.
ahdok 2w ago • 100%
I am the one who snocks.
ahdok 2w ago • 100%
I am the one who snoots.
I'm always cleaning up murder scenes... they all say that they want the gore gone. --- Okay, jokes are done, continue with your day.
ahdok 3w ago • 88%
Well... "ethical" is a thorny subject. The underlying imagenet technology was still built on mturk, and usage still drives up the usage figures for these billion dollar art-thieves to use in their investment rounds. It's still environmentally catastrophic compared to regular image searches, and it's still used by proponents of the technology to normalize its use, so they can promote it to replace jobs.
A good deal of the "ethical" problems with generative-AI are baked into the technology itself... but it's certainly more acceptable than other uses.
ahdok 3w ago • 100%
Unfortunately, there are plenty of people for whom this advice is really needed. I've a couple decades experience running drop-in games and boy do people do this for real. It's a table-wrecker.
ahdok 3w ago • 100%
Crawford's statement there makes it clear that he believes "being turned to dust" kills you. He believes it's so obvious that he doesn't need to explain it. That's why his statement just takes "you're killed" as a given.
The rules aren't written in such a fashion as to very slowly and patiently explain every possible interpretation to you and hold-your hand to finding the correct one. They assume you have a basic reading comprehension. It's not really WotC's job to fix that if it's a failed assumption.
WotC don't issue errata for stuff like this, because they think the argument is facially stupid. If they issued errata for every facially stupid argument, then the errata document would become so large that it'd be unusable - there's an infinite well of dumb takes that don't require an errata to clean up.
That's the job of your DM.
ahdok 3w ago • 100%
Well, regardless of anything, WotC can't prevent this kind of argument by "writing better rules." This isn't the kind of "gotcha" edge case they should need to cover - that's what the DM is for.
Rules lawyers will always appeal to the "the rules don't explicitly state a caveat the one weird edge case I made up that's plainly not intended" as if it's a valid position. You can't build a system this complex and exhaustively cover every take, and the intended mechanism for handling this is that the DM decides if they'll accept such things or not. That depends on your DM and table culture.
As a general piece of advice, this is an extreme level of "the rules don't explicitly say the exact thing I think they should say with the exact wording I demand of them, so therefore my take is RAW". Most DMs would probably not want to keep running a game where this happens regularly. It's exhausting, and they'd rather be getting on with the game, or they'd rather be crafting new NPCs and side-stories. My advice would be to talk things over with your DM away from the table to see what style of game they enjoy before deploying something like this at the table.
You specifically asked for where in RAW it says you can't do this. Cephalotrocity correctly identified the part of RAW that's supposed to do that for you. It's up to you whether you want to accept that or not. It's up to your DM if they want to play with you or not.
Given all this, you asked "where does the RAW say you can't do this" and you've been shown the section that's supposed to do that I don't have much more advice for you - your question has been answered.
I'm going back to drawing silly comics instead.
ahdok 3w ago • 92%
The RAW makes a lot of assumptions about the reading comprehension of the reader though. If you want the RAW to hold your hand through understanding basic English, then you're always going to have these problems.
Look, in your opening post, you state "Clearly, if they intended for disintegration to kill you, they’d have said so."
They HAVE said so. Crawford has explicitly clarified this.
ahdok 3w ago • 83%
It's assumed that the player is clever enough to know that dust is an object, as the player's brain is assumed to not be made of dust.
ahdok 3w ago • 94%
The "present tense" argument is that "the creature can only be restored to life" describes the current state of the creature. It's currently possible to restore the creature to life using wish, and therefore they are currently not alive. This is a plain reading of the RAW, and it's inconsistent with the entire cohort of the rules to claim otherwise.
If that's not good enough for you, then it's also the intention of "reduced to a pile of grey dust" is that players will be intelligent enough to know that dust is an object, and not a creature. There's no statblock for the dust because objects don't have creature stat blocks.
If THAT'S not good enough for you, it's the intention of the rules that the players use common sense when reading them.
If THAT'S not good enough for you, Crawford has explicitly stated that if disintegrate reduces you to 0hp, you're killed - and he wrote the rule.
Any of these four arguments should be enough for a DM to be able to make a sensible ruling here, although normally I don't rely on an appeal-to-Crawford for rulings.
If you want to play a slapstick comedy style campaign where your DM allows things to happen outside of RAW because they're silly or fun or whatever - there's nothing stopping you. The joy of DnD is you can play the game however you like, so long as your group are happy with that.
ahdok 3w ago • 100%
If this was the intent of the rules, it would be expressed in explicit, unambiguous language. They don't write contingency rules for possible future events that haven't happened this way, and if you interpret rules documents this way, then everything becomes an argument.
The implication of "the creature can only be restored to life by (x)..." is present tense. It applies to the current state of the game following the events described. The language "unattended objects catch fire" in fireball doesn't mean "unattended objects in the area of a fireball will catch fire if someone sets fire to them." it means they catch fire.
Language in rules doesn't ambiguously cater to a potential future state of the game that may not occur. It is describing the current state of the game, like the rules do in all other situations.
This comic follows on from the [Previous comic](https://ttrpg.network/post/9857084) which will almost certainly provide context. Just enthralled. Completely spellbound. Beguiled, charmed, under your spell.
This comic follows on from the [Previous comic](https://ttrpg.network/post/9626758) which will almost certainly provide context. This is peak political strategy, we all know it.
This comic follows on from the [Previous comic](https://ttrpg.network/post/8028793) which will almost certainly provide context. You might not wanna be famous, but when you're level 10, every organization within a mile is watching what you're doing.
This comic follows on from the [Previous comic](https://ttrpg.network/post/6990203) which will almost certainly provide context. Zero consideration given to the possibility that Konsi realized this herself and said it deliberately.
Both of the guards have a handle. If the guard that always lies pulls his handle, then the minecart will divert to the second track. If both guards pull their handle, the prisoners will be released. One of the handles is covered by a wooden box, where half of the wooden planks of the original box have been replaced by new ones cut from a tree that fell when nobody was around. If guard A is taller than guard B, are we getting paid for this quest?
This comic follows on from the [Previous comic](https://ttrpg.network/post/6963288) which will almost certainly provide context. Zero consideration given to the possibility that Konsi realized this herself and said it deliberately.
This comic follows on from the [Previous comic](https://ttrpg.network/post/6289509) which might help provide context. Audience entry cost is a silver piece, which you flip. You get to keep it if you call the flip correctly.
This comic follows on from the [Previous comic](https://ttrpg.network/post/5765544) which might help provide context. Why would Konsi play with such a handicap? 1) Growing up as a street urchin, she never really had access to lots of clothes. When not wearing armour, or dressing up for an event, she’s still most comfortable wearing just a simple robe. 2) She’s trying to practice keeping her cool under pressure, and that’s not effective if you have a lot of safety.
This comic follows on from the [Previous comic](https://ttrpg.network/post/5431314) which might help provide context. Technically any poker depicted in a comic strip qualifies for this.
Guess nobody's free to play.
The rules, in this case are pretty clear. The spell never mentions mirrors or reflections, it “summons illusory duplicates." Spell names aren’t indicative of their mechanical effect. See Chill Touch. There’s also vampire wizard statblock that has Mirror Image on its spell list. It *would* be funny if the spell just failed though.
It's good practice!
Remember to always check creative uses of spells with your DM.
Going through the spell list, there's an awful lot of spells that are incredibly funny in the context of bedroom pastimes, here, let's assume it's heroism and Bear's Endurance.