Innovation, Magic, and Science @we-are-artillerist - Tumblr Blog

Prestidigitation

DM: Time to get out the Monster Manual, or as some people like to call it: the Waifu Catalogue.

Me: WHAT.

blimpyou

Sometimes I smash or pass the whole book

What the fuck guys

ultimatefangirl-exe

I like to smash or pass monsters in DnD and Pathfinder books.

evilassumptions

BugBears are legit.

can we not

crankywitchgaia

@celestial-guardian-ragnarok @chika-ann

Smash or pass

chika-ann

Heh… that depends… what’s on the list

dogs

there are dogs on that list

you wanna fuck a dog

wait

this is tumblr

don’t answer that

sciencegenius

dogs? pass.

Liches tho……. ;)))

definitelybeholderrpgideas

That’s actually not a terrible entry to thirst after. I mean, you could technically count it as necrophilia, but its consensual necrophilia, so you do you.

What the fuck

definitelybeholderrpgideas

Of all the reblogs and additions to this post, this is the one you’re shocked by?

Consensual necrophilia is not a phrase I thought I’d hear. Then again this is tumblr, so maybe that’s on me

noblevagrant65

Hot take: the term consensual necrophilia also applies to vampires, since they’re undead creatures. Wanna fuck Strahd? You’re in the same boat with the lich fuckers.

However, what I think the real treasure we’re all sleeping on is liches….in love. Just immortal wizard gals being pals.

I am absolutely here for the immortal undead lesbians

tigressflower007

IS IT STILL NECROPHILIA IF YOU’RE DEAD TOO??

I don’t think so?

vriska-coded

Ok next topic is a dragon and a human beastiality for the dragon?

both are sentient, so its just interspecies sex.

novas-grimoire

…I am now reminded of that argument I got into about whether or not a half-dragon would have a cloaca.

pwbi

This post is an entire dungeon of bad decisions at this point

choryllis

I think you mean legendary decisions

Legendary for being bad

This is not what i expected when i started this blog

To be fair, i wasnt expecting a whole lot when i started this blog in 2014

But it definitely didnt include 10k notes of thirsty monsterfuckers

the-cephalon-weave

11 approaching 12 thousand

Fuck you’re right

scamgar

ok but can we just talk about abberations cuz like they’re intelligent and adults but their minds are inscrutable to humans. so like does that mean you can consent to sex with them? cuz you’re on wayyyy different levels of intelligence? but also they’re an adult with the capacity to give and understand consent? but could a normal sentient’s mind comprehend consenting to sex with them? help me out here i’m confused.

If both parties are sentient, its just interspecies sex, stop trying to overcomplicate things. Just because one species is better at calculus does not complicate the less intelligent species’ capacity for consent.

scamgar

true but in most fiction an abberation’s mind functions in a completely different way from a non-abberation. essentially what i meant to point out was the potential issue of blue and orange morality

Are you seriously trying to start a philosophical debate on this post?

Like, I admire the chutzpah, dude, but it doesn’t matter if one species has a totally alien concept of everything. If both parties know what they want, communicate what they want, and agree with each other on it, its fully informed consent on each side and therefore just regular interspecies sex. Sentience is sentience, even if the way it manifests is wildly different.

scamgar

honestly? i was drunk out of my mind both times i saw this post. also you make a very good point and are correct that flavors of sentience aside, as long as both parties are sentient and consent it’s fine. i apologize for drunk me’s ramblings.

… you get philosophically argumentative when you’re drunk? Thats a mood, my friend

curriedsugar

what even is this post

spaceunicornslover

Not sure. I lost it somewhere and I’m not sure where. Did it change from one subject to another or is it just me not understanding?

averycuteknight

D&D logic & arguments

this post is a disaster and a tragedy and the essence of both D&D and Tumblr, what do y’all want from me

gojirahkiin

I’m reblogging this legendary post not because I have something to contribute (if it can be said on this subject, it already has been), but because I want to be part of its vast and enduring legacy.

Is this post my claim to fame

Is this my internet legacy

Is there a return policy

Can you return internet fame

callmeriser

No your fame is now eternal and I shall repost this every year.

Well shit

howtofightwrite

Q&A: Overpenetration

Suppose three people are standing in a line: A – B – C. A and B are about two meters apart. If person C shoots at B with a hunting rifle, is there a danger that the shot will pass through B and also hit A? I’m trying to construct a scene and wonder if I have to rearrange the way those three are standing. Thank you for your help!

Yes. There are some situations where a bullet might not fully penetrate, but, overpenetration is a thing.

Anytime you have a gunshot wound that creates an exit wound (which is most of the time), the bullet has passed through the victim and continued traveling. This means it can potentially hit someone else.

Hitting multiple people in a row is possible, with a few important caveats. It’s possible for the bullet to strike bone and deflect off in a new direction. Similarly, it’s possible for the bullet to strike bone and shatter, creating multiple exist wounds, any one of which could potentially strike others. It is possible for the bullet to strike bone (or another solid object), embedding in it and stopping it’s travel. (This can also break said bone.) It is possible, though extremely rare, for bone fragments to be ejected from the victim, causing further injuries down range.

From a safety perspective, expect overpenetration. There is a real risk of a round, especially a rifle round, passing through the intended target and striking someone (or something) behind them. As a result, shooters are advised to keep track of their background, (the area behind their target), when firing in an uncontrolled environment.

However, because of the risk of deflections, and bullet trajectories generally being somewhat difficult to fully predict in the moment, you cannot count on overpenetration doing what you want.

It’s also worth knowing that bullets do lose a lot of velocity when they’re punching through meat, so while overpenetration is a thing, it’s not especially likely that a single shot will just keep going through people. It’s possible the second victim wouldn’t have an exit wound (which can a very bad thing.)

So, yes, it could pass through the target, striking the person behind them. At very short ranges, with a high power rifle, that’s the likely outcome. At 2 meters, this can happen with most handguns, rifles or even shotguns (depending on the load.)

Overpenetration is real, and I’ve been dinged in the past for overstating it. However, from a safety perspective, standing behind the target is not a good idea. From a practical perspective, it’s less of a certainty, but given your scenario, it’s quite likely.

-Starke

This blog is supported through Patreon. If you enjoy our content, please consider becoming a Patron. Every contribution helps keep us online, and writing. If you already are a Patron, thank you.

Q&A: Overpenetration was originally published on How to Fight Write.

feyariel

@we-are-artillerist I skuppose @wearecowboy

Do we have a gunslinger?

Githyanki Gunslinger, but chill

Why githyanki, I don't disagree, in just curious why

malevon

new ask meme: send me what class and race you’d think I’d be as a dnd character

I know I'm the Artillerist big, but what vibes do I give off?

bardicknowledgeblogger

If you aren’t already, you should be buying from Cantrip Candles

So, Cantrip Candles has already been a favorite company of mine for awhile purely just because of the quality of the products. They make candles designed to enhance your RPG experience, and they do a great job.

Their candles are divine, are 100% soy (so they don’t smell like burning plastic), have fantastic scents (seriously, there’s a bakery one that just straight up smells like fresh bread. It’s magic, I swear), really well priced, and the big ones even come with a metal D20 sunken in (a sweet bonus)

BUT IN ADDITION

They’re black owned and operated

They partner with and support PRIDE and lgbtq communities year round

Also support other important causes (currently you can pay a dollar to help plant a tree as they partner with the National Forest Foundation)

They’re so nice, great with customer support, and just such a wonderful company. If ever there was time to support a black owned, lgbtq friendly shop, it was now.

They are currently out of stock on a lot due to a surge in support (go figure) but are restocking in the next week. You can get updates about restocks and things like that on their home page.

scifi-fantasy-horror

by terry wei

scifi-fantasy-horror

by Tate S

monstersandmaw

With Halloween around the corner, I’d like to remind everyone again that there will be no screamers or jump scares or whatnot on here. This blog is safe from that.

uesp

“If you’ve ever been severely injured, or deathly ill, and had a healer bring you back from the brink of death, you’ve benefited from necromancy.”

–Yisareh of the Undaunted, arguing that Restoration magic is a form of Necromancy

I’ve been trying to tell these paladins at my gates. Necromancy is magic regarding life and death. Healing magic is just as much necromancy as animating the dead

I wonder what @wearepaladin would think about this?

wearepaladin

I would think it’s the same stupid cop out used by people who say weapons are just tools and then hand them out to people planning to use them to pillage. Necromancy is simplest classification to catch all the terms related to arcane and divine Magics related to manipulation of life and death energies in DND. But there’s a big difference, rooted in training, belief system, and ability between on how to use the school and what can be done with it. Necromancers use the school by harnessing the death/negative energy plane to animate and bind souls and corpses to their bidding which is frowned upon for good reasons. Most if not all practitioners who specialize in that variety of necromancy have to do terrible things in order to access it and the use of it is consistently grim. Those who utilize the positive energies to raise the dead don’t make undead, but fully restored living beings with souls untethered. There is a difference, while the degree of nuance exists, it’s hardly enough to paint full time necromancers as victims of prejudice. Essentially, you can’t say the person who uses sharp metal forged into a torture implement is the same as the scalpel used to heal. You’re going to pick one or the other to better suit a different purpose, and no ones happy to see a doctor use a sickle for heart surgery.

For the record though, that idiot/liar above’s quote is from the TES setting, is fundamentally wrong. Necromancy is Conjuration based, not Restoration based in the TES universe, and those who actively practice it in that world are playing with energies that are fundamentally corruptive. Best illustrated in this video, which delves into all the known lore of Necromancy in The Elder Scrolls universe.

Personally, I find it much more distasteful to rip a soul from its eternal rest for a selfish reason like ‘I missed my friend.’ Of course torturing a soul is evil, nobody is arguing against that. However, saying your necromancy is good and mine is inherently evil is just semantics. Eldritch magic used by warlocks and holy magic used by paladins and clerics have more overlap than either is willing to admit. At the end of the day, a cleric or paladin or druid who raises a person back from the dead is just as much a necromancer as a lich with an army of skeletons. Necromancy is necromancy, regardless on what side the practitioner is on

As a man of study I have to question, if necromancers only approach the study of necromancy from a negative view, and healers only approach it from a positive, them how are there healers who have been the most dangerous fighters in the world, and how are arch lich a possibility, considering they are creatures of good who approach necromancy in much the same way a healer would, as a way to lessen the burden on others, in fact I knew a necromancer once who learned the let’s to becoming an archlich because his son was deathly ill and all the clerics and healers he approached could not hear him no matter how high if magic they used, and so he thought that lichdom would save his child’s life, perhaps I am looking at this through a skewed lense, but they seem both to me to be simply 2 sides of the same coin

we-are-avenger

Necromancy’s morality is determined by the setting in which it is used in. This is fact and this means that if a person so desires to they can choose to make necromancy not evil within their own setting. But since we in the collective primarily focus on dnd I will focus my efforts on the general setting and rules laid out by the handbooks. First off, pathfinder and dnd 5e differ in many ways to their treatment of magic but both use the alignment system. This means that good and evil are empirical forces within the world: meaning they exist and can be proven to exist. Typically this is done by the inclusion of planar outsiders that correspond to a particular alignment but pathfinder takes it a step farther. As the forces of chaos and law and good and evil are apart of the world, this means that those energies and forces can be channeled and thus certain spells can correlate with specific alignments. Meaning that forces of purest arcana can be classified as good or evil. The school of necromancy possesses many spells that fall under the domain of evil, so within the context of the universe it can be empirically proven to be truly evil. Thus the spell raise dead is classified as conjuration rather than necromancy, to help differentiate it from an evil spell and the utilization of negative energy. 5e does not have spells with the evil or even good descriptor. Alignment mainly informs character choices and belief rather than informing mechanics. However it is still apart of the world and thus can be proven to exist and is shown to exist. This is typically done through the existence of planar outsiders like angels or demons. However, undead are also classified as evil within the context of the general setting. It is why protection against good and evil works against the undead. (Sidenote: if anyone tries to argue that this means that undead abominations could actually be classified as good, just know, you are an idiotic contrarian asshole who can and should go fuck themselves.) Therefore it is simply fact that undead and undeath are evil and any attempts to animate the dead using necromancy can be classified as such. Many may point out that, within 5e, raise dead and resurrection are also classified as necromancy spells. This is correct, wizards decided to classify them as such. However they also excluded cure wounds from necromancy, classifying it as evocation instead. Whereas it’s opposite, inflict wounds, is categorized as necromancy. Furthermore, the spells of raise dead, resurrection, and true resurrection are not spells that a necromancy wizard can learn. But what is in their repertoire are spells like animate dead, create undead, and soul cage: spells that do evil things. Furthermore, the necromancy subclass of wizard focuses on the creation and usage of undead, of evil creatures. While there is grey area within 5e about the spells within the school of necromancy, I argue that the utilization of necromancy by arcane casters within dnd is empirically evil. And to the specific example the artillerist posited, achieving lichdom requires the creation of a phylactery, which one must do very very fucked up shit to make. Even if the act was born out of love, that does not and will never excuse what was done to achieve the goal.

Ah ha, I will say that a normal lich is achieved through fucked up processes, such as to require an evil alignment, however there is the arch lich

An archlich is a person of good alignment, who sought lichdom, meaning they would have sought an alternate route to the creation of a phylactery, and such arch lich are a cannon part of the d&d universe, so what I would say is that once again it is the scope you look at the world that defines what is or is not evil

uesp

“If you’ve ever been severely injured, or deathly ill, and had a healer bring you back from the brink of death, you’ve benefited from necromancy.”

–Yisareh of the Undaunted, arguing that Restoration magic is a form of Necromancy

I’ve been trying to tell these paladins at my gates. Necromancy is magic regarding life and death. Healing magic is just as much necromancy as animating the dead

I wonder what @wearepaladin would think about this?

wearepaladin

I would think it’s the same stupid cop out used by people who say weapons are just tools and then hand them out to people planning to use them to pillage. Necromancy is simplest classification to catch all the terms related to arcane and divine Magics related to manipulation of life and death energies in DND. But there’s a big difference, rooted in training, belief system, and ability between on how to use the school and what can be done with it. Necromancers use the school by harnessing the death/negative energy plane to animate and bind souls and corpses to their bidding which is frowned upon for good reasons. Most if not all practitioners who specialize in that variety of necromancy have to do terrible things in order to access it and the use of it is consistently grim. Those who utilize the positive energies to raise the dead don’t make undead, but fully restored living beings with souls untethered. There is a difference, while the degree of nuance exists, it’s hardly enough to paint full time necromancers as victims of prejudice. Essentially, you can’t say the person who uses sharp metal forged into a torture implement is the same as the scalpel used to heal. You’re going to pick one or the other to better suit a different purpose, and no ones happy to see a doctor use a sickle for heart surgery.

For the record though, that idiot/liar above’s quote is from the TES setting, is fundamentally wrong. Necromancy is Conjuration based, not Restoration based in the TES universe, and those who actively practice it in that world are playing with energies that are fundamentally corruptive. Best illustrated in this video, which delves into all the known lore of Necromancy in The Elder Scrolls universe.

Personally, I find it much more distasteful to rip a soul from its eternal rest for a selfish reason like ‘I missed my friend.’ Of course torturing a soul is evil, nobody is arguing against that. However, saying your necromancy is good and mine is inherently evil is just semantics. Eldritch magic used by warlocks and holy magic used by paladins and clerics have more overlap than either is willing to admit. At the end of the day, a cleric or paladin or druid who raises a person back from the dead is just as much a necromancer as a lich with an army of skeletons. Necromancy is necromancy, regardless on what side the practitioner is on

As a man of study I have to question, if necromancers only approach the study of necromancy from a negative view, and healers only approach it from a positive, them how are there healers who have been the most dangerous fighters in the world, and how are arch lich a possibility, considering they are creatures of good who approach necromancy in much the same way a healer would, as a way to lessen the burden on others, in fact I knew a necromancer once who learned the let's to becoming an archlich because his son was deathly ill and all the clerics and healers he approached could not hear him no matter how high if magic they used, and so he thought that lichdom would save his child's life, perhaps I am looking at this through a skewed lense, but they seem both to me to be simply 2 sides of the same coin

weareadventurers

A Bloodrager Joins The Collective

There is power in rage. Those who call themselves barbarians know this well, but they aren’t the only ones to wield fury’s might. These… are the bloodragers. In their blood lies magical might, but these are no sorcerers.The power inside them is awakened not in the form of mystical supremacy, but in a terrifying frenzy of magic and combat. They make for valuable allies… and horrifying enemies. Everyone, please welcome @we-are-bloodrager to the Collective!