“The Grass is Snitching on the Sheep” sounds like the ramblings of a madman but here it’s just awesome.

This is part of the reason I love Monster of the Week. Unlike in many TTRPGs, the default expectation is that you all have a common backstory.

I just think whether or not each and every player here has an outrageously high stat and what those stats are is a bit of an unnecessary hassle to add to the already long list of things the GM needs to keep track of.

The problem with this argument is that first off, the GM can’t know your character sheet front-to-back because they’re not playing your character, so they probably don’t know if even a 1 will pass the DC they’ve set.

1/20 is much less regular than 5/20 or even 19/20

It’s still far more common than is reasonable.

No, you’re not understanding. There is nothing saying, RAW, you can’t play as a gnoll. The RAW is that you can’t choose a gnoll as your race - but in the case of being polymorphed into one, you didn’t choose that, you were changed into one. And the RAW for that is to assume that everything works the same as before, barring what is explicitly said in the spell for that transformation. And once again, nothing in the spell says you stop playing as a character who is transformed, regardless of if the transformation is “playable” or not. There is not even a “playable” tag for anything, anywhere, in RAW.

But nothing explicitly states that you stop playing as the character you were playing as if they were transformed, whether into a playable character option or not. There is no rule saying that that character is playable, but there is no rule saying you can’t play as them. Again, spells do what they say they do.

I mean, if a friend bit you would it not cause some aff-Oh, just friends, not roommates…hm…

The target’s game statistics, including mental ability scores, are replaced by the statistics of the new form. It retains its alignment and personality.

OP could’ve just repeated “spells do what they say they do.” It doesn’t say you lose control of your character in the new form, all it says about the new form and how that affects the character is…well, that line(plus a few other things about the gear they were wearing and whatnot).

The argument here should be “yes,” as arguing according to the rules is arguing in bad faith. That’s the point of the post lel.

Casting a spell and holding it uses visible components the hobgoblin could react to.

I’d think it’d take at least an arcana check to know that the spell you’re holding is Jump. So yeah, he could react, but would he necessarily be able to react in time to stop you from casting the spell? Not to mention, if he reacts just barely not in time and jumps haphazardly, one could argue the Wizard jumped farther and therefore wins.

I think the weird part of Gate Seal was just its duration and casting time(seriously why does it take a minute it’s a 4th level spell). And as for Incite Greed - is that misinterpretation not reasonable? The charm is that they stare at the gem greedily but it…makes no mention of what happens to the gem, or what happens if the gem leaves your person.

I think the one you’re replying was making the point that you could just swap out “goblins” in that claim with “humans with slightly different features.”

Y-you…you do realize the lich, as liches generally work this way, was probably once human, right? And is choosing to believe all life must be quelled? Like…that’s an example of an irredeemably evil person who is actively choosing to be irredeemably evil. Moron.

You should probably have specified mindless undead, not just all undead. In fact…anything mindlessly violent. Demons, zombies, etc.

What exactly does this mean? If you’re ignoring remove curse it’s because being able to remove a curse with just a spell is boring - the point of a curse in fiction is to be a challenge to remove.

Well, jeez. Didn’t mean to spark something. Just for the record - I also dislike D&D. Currently trying to move away from it with a Fallout campaign I got going.

My Warlock whose patron is her cat:
Correct.

Now THIS is a real Swiss Army Man.

As someone has mentioned, “Pass” and “Fail” are not the only possible outcomes of any given roll. That’s why there are numbers on the dice besides 1 and 20.
Also, the GM doesn’t usually(and also shouldn’t, with everything else they need to keep track of) memorize every aspect of all their players’ character sheets - they don’t necessarily KNOW if the check is impossible to pass or fail.

I don’t know if 5th has that as an official rule or it’s a common house rule.

It’s mentioned somewhere in Chapter 8 of the DMG.