dnd 5e – Does the effect of Luring Song of a Harpy end RAW when the affected character stops hearing the song?

“Until the song ends” is a bit unclear

The wording here gives us less than what we’d really to have for a clear ruling. The Luring Song plainly states that as long as you can hear it, you are susceptible and that it continues until the song stops.

Adding silence into the scenario presents us with a difficult set of options. On one hand, it makes perfect logical sense that if the area is under silence, then no song is heard. But what happens? The Luring Song isn’t clear about that situation, so that leaves the DM with some options.

I hear nothing!

A DM could very reasonably rule that an unheard song is a stopped song. Whether or not it means it’s temporary or if they can be lured again would be up to the DM as well.

The power is in sustaining the song

The language also isn’t clear in how the song’s power is really used. A DM could also very easily rule that once under the sway, the only ways to end it are the actual singing stopping or the harpy being incapacitated. We can have all sorts of fluff as to why that still works, but it’s magic is always a solid option, but if you want more you can look at this as as parallel to concentration mechanics where as long as the harpy is singing, the song’s effects continue.

Go with what goes well at the table

Ultimately, these decisions come down to what works narratively and thematically at the table. What tells a more interesting story for you and your players? That’s the question you’ll need to ask yourself here.

optics – What causes the frosted glass effect of out-of-focus areas?

Well, the subject area you indicate does look like you may have photographed it through glass (from inside a room to outside).

But that aside, most of the “frosted glass” look you see here is noise reduction/interpolation. Sensors in phones are small and comparatively noisy (particularly in limited light) but the processing power in phones makes it comparatively attainable to do significant computational processing that glosses over that noise. This smearing effect is not unique to phone pictures and is typical for smaller sensor cameras with high pixel counts under limited light. The resulting overunique areas are often likened to a “watercolor” effect. Your phone is apparently going more for a Monet effect. Adaptive algorithms mean that this kind of smearing tends to get applied to regions without obvious edges, and for obvious edges to cover small areas, the image needs to be quite in-focus.

If you want a less impressionistic rendition of the out-of-focus areas, you need better cameras (the remaining noise makes obvious that there is a reason for the noise reduction level) or higher exposure.

However, if this is a phone photograph we are talking about, the reason may be a completely different one: the kind of blur you show here is more than the small optics of a phone camera would usually deliver. Granted, there is a close subject in front that the focus is on and that is sort of the best case for blurring. But a lot of “smart” smartphone camera processing these days computationally tries to add blurring to out-of-focus areas that just isn’t delivered by the optics, in order to make for a more “photographic” look.

The blur blotching depends on a 3D model of the scene estimated from smaller amounts of blur and possibly an additional camera with a different perspective, and the model will be blotchy due to noise again.

Blur blotching is only approximate: for example, if you have a point light source hidden beyond a small in-focus object, with actual optics “looking around” the in-focus object, you’ll see the bokeh of the point light as a halo around the object. Smartphone blurring, in contrast, cannot make visible by blurring what it cannot see.

If you take large/sensitive sensors and/or old cameras that don’t do a lot of smart processing, the results will be a lot closer to what you expect them to be.

By the way: you don’t get “Gaussian blur”: that’s more for the effects of inexact optics. Out-of-focus bokeh has the shape of the entrance pupil as visible from the respective point in the scene (this is relevant for wide angles and/or “cat’s eye bokeh”), scaled by the percentage that the scene point is away from the focus plane (bokeh before and behind the focus plane are inverted in orientation).

dnd 5e – Does shoving a creature end the effect of the Hypnotic Pattern spell on them?

This seems pretty straightforward to me. There are two ways to break the effect of hypnotic pattern

  1. The affected creature takes damage
  2. Another creature uses its action to shake the creature out of its stupor

Obviously, the first case doesn’t apply here, since there’s no damage taken.

I would say that the second case also doesn’t apply for two different reasons.

First, there is no other creature using “its action” to do anything to the affected creature. When rules refer to a creature “using its action”, that’s generally taken to mean their one combat action on their turn. If it applied to bonus actions, it would say “bonus action”.

Secondly, the phrasing “uses its action to shake the creature out of its stupor” implies that the action is intentional. Unless the other creature is trying to break the pattern effect, the condition will persist through all sorts of other actions – casting other spells on the creature, healing it, grappling it, or shoving it (either physically, or with telekinesis).

How was this effect created?

How do I achieve this effect ?
multiple reflections on wall live

blades in the dark – When taking level 1 harm, do all rolls have less effect?

When taking level 1 harm, do all rolls have less effect? Or only when it applies to the narrative action?

For example: I have Bruised Arm as a level 1 harm. I want to bribe a Bluecoat to let us into a warehouse full of confiscated drugs. Do I roll with unaltered effect, or with one tier lower effect because of the bruised arm?

Looking for an answer rules as written.

How to create this effect manually?

Hello everyone, I am new and I am glad to be here; I would like to ask for your help

regarding this tutorial, is fine and I like it because is simple, the action used helps to improve and save a lot of time, but, is there any tutorial, to learn how to do this manually…?

I would like to learn each step

spells – Question about Guards and Wards confusion effect

The 6th level Sorcerer/Wizard spell Guards and Wards features a confusion effect, quoted from the text it states:

Confusion
Where there are choices in direction—such as a corridor intersection or side passage—a minor confusion-type effect functions so as to make it 50% probable that intruders believe they are going in the opposite direction from the one they actually chose. This is an enchantment, mind-affecting effect. Saving Throw: None. Spell Resistance: Yes.
https://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/guardsAndWards.htm

How is this implemented in the actual sense of players at the game table? Does the GM roll whenever the PCs make a choice at a corridor intersection and if the result is that they are confused, he or she states ‘you think you are going in the wrong direction.’ This seems odd as all this particular aspect of the spell seems to do is prompt a line of GM dialog whenever he is required to test and rolls 50 or under.

I would have thought it would have at least prompted an effect similar to the actual confusion spell where the test is made and if failed the player characters actually physically go in the wrong direction while still believing they are travelling in the direction they chose. But reading the spell description that isn’t what’s happening at all.

dnd 5e – Can any effect in the game prevent gaining temporary hit points?

Certain effects in the game, such as the Chill Touch spell, prevent (re)gaining hit points :

On a hit, the target (…) can’t regain hit points until the start of your next turn.

But can any effect in the game prevent (re)gaining temporary hit points ?

The goal is partially to find a counter to abilities that “refresh” temporary hit points on a per-round basis, like the Heroism spell or the Twilight Sanctuary Channel Divinity.

Although these abilities have specific counters of their own (break concentration / dispel magic for Heroism, have the recipient be too far away from the Twilight Sanctuary), I’m wondering if any effect in the game says “this target cannot (re)gain temporary hit points for (X duration)”.

dnd 5e – When an NPC is under the effect of Dominate Person, can they cast spells under orders?

Yes, you can order a dominated NPC to cast spells

With a few caveats:
Let’s look at some of the details in the spell Dominate Person

You can use this telepathic link to issue commands to the creature while you are conscious (no action required), which it does its best to obey.

You can specify a simple and general course of action, such as “Attack that creature,” “Run over there,” or “Fetch that object.”

You can use your action to take total and precise control of the target. Until the end of your next turn, the creature takes only the actions you choose, and doesn’t do anything that you don’t allow it to do.

During this time you can also cause the creature to use a reaction, but this requires you to use your own reaction as well. (SRD, p. 138, same as PHB)

Any spell that can be cast “to attack” or otherwise “do something” is eligible for you to require of the dominated NPC as long as they have it prepared/known and have the spell slot.

Note that you can also take control of the NPC with your action and exercise that with a bit more precision, with the risk that anything that it would do naturally isn’t done such as move out of the way of a rolling boulder – unless you tell it to do so. In this usage, you’d need to tell the NPC “move away from the rolling boulder” or said NPC would just stand there.

And, if it knows counterspell, or has it prepared, you can use your reaction and make the NPC use its reaction to cast counterspell (if the situation calls for it).

Getting that NPC to cast ‘dominate person’ on another NPC gets into some recursive shenanigans, but if you took that “total and precise control” that looks to be a way to ‘chain’ dominate person (providing the spell saves are missed).

dnd 5e – Can an area of effect spell be cast through total cover?

Your ruling is almost correct.

The rules concerning a clear path to the target state:

To target something, you must have a clear path to it, so it can’t be behind total cover.

If you place an area of effect at a point that you can’t see and an obstruction, such as a wall, is between you and that point, the point of origin comes into being on the near side of that obstruction.

Since storm sphere is an area of effect, its point of origin should come into being on the near side of the wall of ice. To be technical, it is not that she cannot cast the spell, rather, she can cast the spell, but it does not come into effect where she wants it to.

There is an alternative you could have presented.

The wall of ice is only 10 feet tall, and the radius of storm sphere is 20 feet, so it is conceivable that a sphere placed in the air on the other side of the wall could have the desired effect. Though, your mileage may vary based on the form of the battlefield.