dnd – 100% Best Unlimited Private Proxies: Fast, Cheap and Secure

dnd 5e – How much damage is dealt/taken when that damage also reduces a creature to 0 hit points?

You do the full amount of the damage

Not the difference between the creature’s current hp and 0.

In the basic rules, when talking about hp:

A creature’s current hit points (usually just called hit points) can be any number from the creature’s hit point maximum down to 0.

As you noted in the question, the total amount of damage dealt is a factor. After deducting the amount of damage necessary to bring a creature to 0 hp, if the remainder is equal to or greater than the the creature’s maximum hp (not current hp) then they sufferer instant death.

Let’s examine Bob, who has a maximum hp of 10, but currently has 5 remaining. Bob picks a fight with a dragon that uses a bite attack against Bob. If the damage is 1-4, then Bob should play the lottery as he is very lucky and still standing. If the damage is 5-24, then Bob goes “down to 0” hp. If the damage is 25+, then Bob is instantly killed; after deducting the 5 points to bring Bob to 0 hp, the remainder is double Bob’s maximum hp. So there is a precedence in 5th edition for counting all damage not just going to 0 hp.

In previous editions there was a concept of “negative hit points”. Basically, characters would take damage as normal. Once they reached 0 hp, they were considered unconscious. But you would still track the hp down to -10, and once you hit -10 hp you were completely dead. On top of this, every round that you remained under 0 hp and did not receive medical help, you would lose one more hp; going from -1 to -2 to -3, down to -10; effectively bleeding out. This was the old form of “death saving throws”, or a mechanic to prolong the time before a character died outright.

So back to Bob and the dragon; in old school gaming, from 1-4 damage would still be lucky, 5-14 would be unconscious, and 15+ would be instant death.

I bring up the past edition rules only because it shows that D&D has included the concept of counting damage exceeding what is required to drop a character for quite some time.

Back to your case; your Paladin can rebuke the full 13 damage.

dnd 5e – Immovable Object+net interaction

It’s up to the DM.

There are a lot of moving (unmoving?) pieces to this interaction that are not entirely clear. The DM is going to have to rule on something somewhere.

Immovable object doesn’t protect the net from swords.

The rules for being trapped in a net state:

Dealing 5 slashing damage to the net (AC 10) also frees the creature without harming it, ending the effect and destroying the net.

Nothing in the spell description of immovable object can mitigate this. So the immovable net can be destroyed by dealing 5 slashing damage to it.

What happens next is unclear.

Did the slashing damage destroy the net enough such that even an unmovable net is not enough to contain the target? Who’s to say? (The DM is to say).

Trying to break free from the net using strength and move the net using strength is glitchy, DM may need to patch.

The spell is somewhat glitchy when used with a net. Here’s why. The net says:

A creature can use its action to make a DC 10 Strength check, freeing itself or another creature within its reach on a success.

Immovable object says:

a creature can use an action to make a Strength check against your spell save DC.

Arguably, you have to be able to move the net to attempt to escape from it, and attempting to move the net requires an action, but so does escaping. Technically, it would require two actions on a single turn to try to escape from the net using strength. This makes it impossible to escape from this way, technically.

In this situation, I would allow the target to attempt to escape using a single action, making a strength check against the appropriate DC for immovable object, but at disadvantage because it is a net.

dnd 5e – Illusory Script contract fraud

It is up to the DM to determine how cosmic powers adjudicate fraudulent contracts.

Mechanically, this works out just fine. Illusory script says:

You write on parchment, paper, or some other suitable writing material and imbue it with a potent illusion that lasts for the duration.

To you and any creatures you designate when you cast the spell, the writing appears normal, written in your hand, and conveys whatever meaning you intended when you wrote the text. To all others, the writing appears as if it were written in an unknown or magical script that is unintelligible. Alternatively, you can cause the writing to appear to be an entirely different message, written in a different hand and language, though the language must be one you know.

On the player facing side, this will appear to work as you have described. The actual contract will be written however you like, and the spell will make it appear however you like.

But how cosmic third parties relate to this fraudulent contract is entirely up to the DM. Only your DM can tell you if the contract will be binding at all, and if so, which form of the contract will be binding.

dnd 5e – D&D 5e inspiration dice as currency for PCs to improve their characters?

Has anyone heard of, or thought out, or even used D&D 5e inspiration dice as currency for PCs to improve their characters? I allow PCs to accumulate them, so it occurred to me, “why not let them buy a skill, feat, spell slot, etc… for ‘x’ number of I-Dice? Thoughts? Possible costs in I-Dice for each?”

dnd 5e – How can I have low-level 5e necromancer NPCs controlling many, many undead in this converted adventure?

Make a high level wizard that behaves as a low level wizard

There is one characteristic about wizard that are common through every D&D game, they are extremely squishy, especially if they are badly built or they used all their spells before a fight. A wizard without spells is not different than a level 1 fighter with more hp, maybe better to hit chance and, probably, worse AC. Another thing, by RAW the spell Animate Dead and Create undead apply a spell slot tax to maintain the the undead horde, this will reduce the number of spells that the wizard may cast.

Animate Dead: To maintain control of the creature for another 24 hours, you must cast this spell on the creature again before the current 24-hour period ends.

There are some consideration to have so the “high level” wizard maintain a reasonable challenge rating. There are 3 particular things to look for; cantrips, intelligence and spell slots, and proficiency bonus.

Cantrips

In this edition all attack cantrips rise in power as the wizard increase in levels, but it is done at specific levels: at 5, 11 and 17. The minimum level of the wizard is 5, since Animate Dead is a level 3 spell, therefore one possible level to keep it as low as possible is 10 or at most 16.

Firebolt: This spell’s damage increases by 1D10 when you reach 5th level (2D10), 11th level (3D10), and 17th level (4D10)

Intelligence and spell slots

In 5e intelligence does not increase the number of spell slots that a wizard may have and the cap for each spell level is achieve quite fast. For example, at level 4 the maximum spell slot for level 1 and 2 spells are reached, and at level 6 level 3 spells are maxed out (Table on PHB 113). This implies that increasing intelligence will not impact the spell progression, only the chance to hit with spells, DC and INT related saves and skills. A well built Wizard would have INT capped at level 8.

Proficiency bonus

To make it short, the relevant capstone for proficiency bonus are 9 and 13 since 5 is absolutely necessary for Animate Dead by RAW.

Wizard apparent level

Aside for HP and the capstone discussed previously, what really limits the apparent level of the wizard is the spell at his disposal. An example on a level 6 wizard, If we use every single third level spell slot we can have 12 zombies, four for each third level spell slot, the apparent level would be 4. Yes, bounded accuracy is a thing in this edition, but depending on the spells this might not even matter (e.g. Magic Missile: no save, no DC and not miss chance)

Animate Dead: At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 4th level or higher, you animate or reassert
control over two additional undead creatures for each slot level above
3rd.

Magic Missile: You create three glowing darts of magical force. Each dart hits a creature of your choice that you can see within
range.

Number of undead by capstone

Since the objective is to have the maximum number of undeads while keeping a low apparent level as possible, all high level spell slots are used to cast animate dead:

At Level 7 (pre ASI): 12 + 6 = 18 (3 level 3, 1 level 4)
At Level 8 (pre proficiency bonus): 12 + 12 = 24 (3 level 3, 2 level 4)
At level 10 (pre cantrip damage increase): 12 + 18 + 16 = 46 (3 level 3, 3
level 4, 2 level 5)
At level 12 (pre proficiency bonus): 12 + 18 + 16 + 10 = 56 (3 level 3, 3 level 4, 2 level 5, 1 level 6)

At level 10, the wizard is capable of keeping 46 undead under his command by RAW, while maintaining the same spells as a level 4 wizard. An example of a hampered wizard would be:

Half elf level 10 Wizard (Average HP: 32 (6 + 36 – 10 (-1 con))

STR: 9
DEX: 12 (11+1)
CON: 8
INT: 20 (15 + 1 + 4)
WIS: 14
CHA: 16 (14 + 2)

This would yield a +2 DC and hit over a level 5 wizard with the same INT progression, and the same 32 HP that a level 3 Fighter with CON 14 would have. Nothing impressive if you ask me (aside for the sheer number of undeads).

Tips

Multiclass: If you multiclass with, for example, a Death Domain Cleric, it won’t hamper the spell slot progression but it will diminish some benefits of the level 6 and a 10 wizard schools capstone. This even apply a little MAD and would be thematically relevant. It would gain more HP and a better AC with armor, this might be good since it would not be so squishy.
More squishy wizards more undeads: 4 wizards can control almost 200 undeads and they don’t need to fight the party at the same time.
Keep calm, build them bad: The more you mess with the built, the weaker and more challenge appropriate it will be. “Bad” choices would make some good RP elements (mistakes happen to everyone, maybe a level in sorcerer was not his best idea).

dnd 5e – Would the Gust spell be able to move someone under the effect of the Levitate spell?

Point of clarification: the question as you pose it in your title asks if gust can move “someone” under the effects of levitation, but in the body of your question you are specifically asking about moving yourself. I will focus on the latter.

By Rules as Written? No, absent DM fiat.

The general rule is that spells do only what they say they do, and anything more is up to the DM. The description of gust, which you’ve quoted, says it can be used to push others, but says nothing about moving the caster.

To put this in perspective, consider that you are effectively looking to use gust to target yourself on the receiving end of the push effect. Technically, targeting yourself might be fair game; the spell says you can target “(o)ne Medium or smaller creature that you choose,” and you could perhaps choose yourself. The trouble is, the target is “pushed up to 5 feet away from you,” and you cannot be pushed away from yourself. The DM could choose to ignore that bit of illogic, but it would be fiat.

By Rules as Fun? Absolutely yes.

Gust is an underwhelming cantrip. Most of its effects are duplicative of other (better) cantrips — except for the push effect, which can be achieved just as easily by any character using the rules for shoving a creature. See PHB p. 195. Permitting a PC to cast gust in order to achieve 5 feet of lateral movement while levitating rewards creative play, and is highly unlikely to break the game. (Consider, for example, how difficult it would be to abuse this setup in combat. The PC is expending an entire action for 5 feet of movement.)

dnd 5e – What happens to excess material used for the spell fabricate?

I don’t think there is official guidance on it. The spell description itself doesn’t suggest anything specific, saying only that you need a “sufficient quantity”.

In my games the spell doesn’t affect things that don’t go into the thing that’s being fabricated, though. If you need one chair’s worth of wood, then that’s all the wood that the spell directly affects and nothing at all happens to the rest of the forest. I’ve found this helpful specifically because it cuts down on unintended consequences.

Also of note: if your players want to clear a section of forest there’s no need to try to cheat the spell with excess material to deal with. They can just make a 10x10x10 cube of wood, for example. If they don’t care what happens to the wood that’s as good as anything else they might make and then ignore.

dnd 5e – D&D 5e inspiration dice as currency for PCs to improve their characters?

dnd 5e – Does the off-hand gauntlet of the Guardian Artificer gain the bonus Intelligence modifier?

D&D 5e does not distinguish between main and off hand.

Nowhere do the rules make a distinction between main hand and off hand.

The Thunder Gauntlets are not light melee weapons.

Now, for the purposes of two weapon fighting, you cannot use the gauntlets to make a bonus action attack, as two weapon fighting requires each weapon to be a light melee weapon:

When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you’re holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you’re holding in the other hand. You don’t add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus attack, unless that modifier is negative.

The gauntlets do not have the light property:

Each of the armor’s gauntlets counts as a simple melee weapon while you aren’t holding anything in it.

They both get the bonus.

The “special weapon” of the Guardian Armorer is:

Each of the armor’s gauntlets

Each gauntlet is itself a weapon, and each gets the bonus from your intelligence modifier to attack and damage rolls.

Each model includes a special weapon. When you attack with that weapon, you can add your Intelligence modifier, instead of Strength or Dexterity, to the attack and damage rolls.

I know it says “weapon”, singular, and the guardian technically gets two, one for each hand.