dnd 5e – Can you use a large creature’s dead body as a means to walk over a grease spell so that you are unaffected by that spell?

Here’s the spell description:

Slick grease covers the ground in a 10-foot square centered on a point within range and turns it into difficult terrain for the duration.

When the grease appears, each creature standing in its area must succeed on a Dexterity saving throw or fall prone. A creature that enters the area or ends its turn there must also succeed on a Dexterity saving throw or fall prone.

There is no rule “grease spell effect is negated when a large creature is lying upon” in any official source book. We on the internet can only tell you that spells do based on their description only, because we are not DMing your game. We cannot change or expand upon the rules and say “this is part of how the spell works”. We do not have that authority; the DM of the game does, and we aren’t that.

The Grease spell covers 10-foot square, and a large creature does not cover 10-foot square:

A creature’s space is the area in feet that it effectively controls in combat, not an expression of its physical dimensions. (PHB p. 191)

You can try to walk over it, but the result will depend on the situation — how exactly the creature is lying, what body does that creature have, et cetera. This is the DMs job to adjudicate such things, so it becomes exactly the “ask your DM” type of question.

One thing we can say though — there is no “fluff” ignorable text in that description. It says “slick grease covers the ground”, therefore this slick grease is the exact reason why a walking creature “must succeed on a Dexterity saving throw or fall prone”. If you completely cover the grease with something big and heavy enough to be a sound surface, it probably negates the spell effect (but still, ask your DM).

eu – Which types of UK visa applications are affected by entry bans, and which are unaffected?

In the UK, policy is to “ban” applicants from entering for various periods of between 1 and 10 years if they are found to commit various misdeeds, like deception on an application, overstaying one’s leave to be in the country, illegal entry, using fraudulent identities while in the country, etc.,

It’s clear that the bans are applied to applications for certain visa types like visitor and tier 4 visas.

Yet, I gather that certain types of applications would trump such bans, and thus not be affected by them, and I further imagine that some other types may perhaps weigh and be influenced by them as one factor of consideration, but not be absolutely determined by them a priori to consideration of the merits of the contents of the actual application itself.

Applications under EDHR article 8 come to mind as those which would likely be wholly unfazed by the presence or absence of an active ban on the subject from the country.

uk – Which types of visa route applications do entry bans have any bearing upon, and which are unaffected?

In the UK, policy is to “ban” applicants from entering for various periods of between 1 and 10 years if they are found to commit various misdeeds, like deception on an application, overstaying one’s leave to be in the country, illegal entry, using fraudulent identities while in the country, etc.,

It’s clear that the bans are applied to applications for certain visa types like visitor and tier 4 visas.

Yet, I gather that certain types of applications would trump such bans, and thus not be affected by them, and I further imagine that some other types may perhaps weigh and be influenced by them as one factor of consideration, but not be absolutely determined by them a priori to consideration of the merits of the contents of the actual application itself.

Applications under EDHR article 8 come to mind as those which would likely be wholly unfazed by the presence or absence of an active ban on the subject from the country.

dnd 5e – Are creatures that are immune to disease unaffected by the Harm spell?

I will begin with the statement that all spell descriptions are rules, the text is not merely flavor text. The spell text for Harm, as noted in the question, begins:

You unleash a virulent disease on a creature that you can see within range.

Both the damage and the reduced hit point maximum are the result of this virulent disease unleashed upon the target. If the target of Harm is immune to all disease, via the Paladin’s Divine Health class feature or any other means, they would be immune to any affects of the disease. In this case that would confer immunity to both the damage caused by the disease as well as the lasting effect.

Therefore, I would rule that disease immunity gives full immunity from the Harm spell and any other spell that specifically causes its effect through disease.

Recommend the server unaffected by the vulnerabilities of Intel CPUs to offer Shared / Reseller / VPS

In fact, I prefer AMD chipsets over Intel

Check out AMD Ryzen 3900X 12c, 24t 3.8ghz) servers, or maybe an AMD Opteron 6272 (16x to 2.1gz). I am not sure of the size of your business or the needs of RAM / CPU / disk, since you did not mention anything in your publication.

Recommend the server unaffected by the vulnerabilities of Intel CPUs to offer Shared / Reseller / VPS

In fact, I prefer AMD chipsets over Intel

Check out AMD Ryzen 3900X 12c, 24t 3.8ghz) servers, or maybe an AMD Opteron 6272 (16x to 2.1gz). I am not sure of the size of your business or the needs of RAM / CPU / disk, since you did not mention anything in your publication.

dnd 5e – Are enemies with immunity to the poisoning condition unaffected by contagion?

After the PHB 2018 errata, the spell contagion now inflicts the Poisoned condition on a successful melee spell attack. The text of the relevant spell is below, with the updated parts highlighted in bold:

Your touch inflicts diseases. Make a melee spell attack against a creature within reach. In one hit, the target is poisoned.

At the end of each turn of the poisoned target, the target must make a Constitution save roll. If the target achieves three of these saves, he is no longer poisoned and the spell ends. If the target fails three of these saves, the target is no longer poisoned, but chooses one of the following diseases. The target is subject to the chosen disease for the duration of the spell.

Since this spell induces a natural disease in its target, any effect that eliminates a disease or that otherwise improves the effects of a disease applies to it.

The wording of the spell leads me to conclude that this spell still inflicts a disease, which has the immediate effect of poisoning the target. Therefore, even if an objective has immunity to the poison, they will continue to make the liftings of the Constitution as designated to see if the disease has an effect.

However, the line, "At the end of each turn of the poisoned target …" It also leads me to think that an enemy with poisonous immunity can not be the target poisoned, therefore, does not allow the remaining sequence of events.

They are targets with immunity to Poisoned condition therefore immune to contagion?