D&D 5E 20th level Sorcerer vs the world

[Hohige]

Between the Alert feat and the Foresight spell, the diviner cannot be surprised. Doesn't need to see the Bastion for the Bastion to fail to surprise him.

Cannot be Surprised is nothing.
Useless. It means that in your First turn you have your Reaction and action.
Nothing more.
It doesnt allow you detect nothing.

 

[prabe]

Surprise is nothing.
Useless. It means that in your First turn you have your Reaction and action.
Nothing more.
It doesnt allow you detect nothing.

Read the rules. Determine surprise. Determine positions. Roll initiative. Go in order.

If you are surprised, you don't get to move or act or react in the first round of combat.

The diviner is not surprised, so the diviner gets to act, move, and react in the first round of combat.

 

[Hohige]

Read the rules. Determine surprise. Determine positions. Roll initiative. Go in order.

If you are surprised, you don't get to move or act or react in the first round of combat.

The diviner is not surprised, so the diviner gets to act, move, and react in the first round of combat.

You Will never roll initiative. For you, you arent involved in combat.
Cannot be Surprised is totally useless against Bastion's tatic.

 

[prabe]

You Will never roll initiative.
Cannot be Surprised is totally useless against Bastion's tatic.

Because the Bastion's tactic doesn't take the rules of D&D 5E into account, I suppose.

 

[Hohige]

Because the Bastion's tactic doesn't take the rules of D&D 5E into account, I suppose.

I strongly disagree.

 

[prabe]

I strongly disagree.

Because you either don't understand the rules, or you don't believe they say what they say.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

Still no strategy that work both against a Wizard with very common Contingency like "I become (greater) invisible whenever I am about to be the victim of an hostile action" and "I fly up in the air whenver I am about..." so ? Both very common, useful to protect against common threats and which doesn't rely on any knowledge of the threat. They work against being bit by a stray dog and visibly against the bastion as well.

Uses of DM fiat spells and metagame in a mixture:

You strategy of calling DM fiat at any strategy you don't like is showing. And not working.

Wish
Divine Intervention
Commune
Elemental Conjure
Conjure Animal
Contingency against a enemy's strategy that the caster doesn't know nothing about.

Either any effect that is explicit that the DM decides the effect of the spell or the creatures it will choose is directly a totally DM dependent skill, literally, as this spell description itself is described.

The effects were carefully selected not to rely on DM having to choose anything. Actually its the contrary, some of the spell gives the opportunty for the DM to deny answers. But that's DM fiat, and even if that might be the case in real play, it's explicitely forbidden by the rules you put forth. Unlike you, we're trying to respect the rules of the contest. Including "using D&D".

Even worse, the uses of this are still loaded with metagames, as they may not even know what kind of threat.

They don't need to.

This only proves that Bastion's strategy is necessary the famous "DM, I have no idea what is happening, help me" to try to defeat him.

Most interesting of all, that Bastion could use the same strategy more efficiently, it just doesn't because it is obviously DM fiat.

No, he can't because you couldn't come up with them. That's why the Cheating One is reduced to randomly walking and casting Meteor Swarm at a one mile distance at every living biped he vaguely see in the distance, then taking a long rest to regenerate his 9th level spell and take two days worth of short rest.

Clone? When you are 0 hp, we estabilize you, avoiding death. So, cast Flesh to Stone, Now you are an statue, forever.
The Wizard is gone, forever.

No. Your strategy being to Meteor Swarm at a ONE MILE distance, you can't cover it and stabilize in the three rounds it takes to die (if the Wizard was a PC and not a mere NPC, who don't benefit from death saves).

"1. Commune.

By RAW, you can ask three questions and must receive a correct answer on all case. There is a paragraphe stating that deities aren't necessarily omniscient so the DM can always veto some information, but that's DM fiat to block the spell, not to provide the RAW-abiding correct answer. Questions can only be answered by yes or no. Anyone who played "Who is it?" can imagine how to draw a composite face of the culprit in a few questions, and identifying his name takes a few tries (Is the name starting with A?...) Drawback: it takes a long time since you can reliably cast it only once per long rest."

Commune:
"so you might receive "unclear"

totally DM fiat, you have no idea who is attacking you, you think they are the Wizards themselves and Bastion is totally hidden against Divination. Your answer is "Unclear" because the bastion is hidden against divination.

YES. Receiving "unclear" is totally DM fiat, as evidenced by the fact that the DM "can always veto". And since DM fiat is verboten we must conclude that the DM doesn't use DM fiat and you can ask three questions and MUST receive a correct answer. DM fiat is refusing to answer by RAW.

Cheating One being hidden against divination is an unsubstantiated claim. You established the Cheating One strategy to under constant nondetection, which does that "For the duration, you hide a target that you touch from divination magic. The target can be a willing creature or a place or an object no larger than 10 feet in any dimension. The target can’t be targeted by any divination magic or perceived through magical scrying sensors." Commune has a target of self, it doesn't target the Cheating One. It also doesn't create any "magical scrying sensor". Mind Blank has a much wider application since it "foils spells used [...] to gain information about the target". But you established, several time, that the Cheating One and his party are NOT under constant Mind Blank. You answered that when you claimed to be able to cast Meteor Swarm because "obviously" the Cheating One hadn't cast Mind Blank. So, by your own admission, the spell can work unimpeded and can't be countered without DM fiat.

3. Glyph of Warding

Triggers are more limited. Choose a visual spell light that can target an area in a spell glyph, triggered by proximity of the guy you seek, of which there is no limit. Nothing defeat the Rod of Dichotomy ^2. Drawback : can take a few days.

It failed, because you don't know who is the threat.

There is no need to know about the threat. That's the principle of Glyph of Warding: you usually don't know who's going to break in.

Also, we automatically detect all magical traps. just dispel it or just move it more than 10ft with Mage Hand lol

You really don't understand math, don't you? Nobody will ever cast it a less than a mile's range from your team...

4. Scrying

You only need to have heard of the target. Best case: it works. But even if it fails, you gather information. If the target is protected from appearing to magical sensors, you can see their surroundings. That's enough to attempt a teleport. Of course you risk failing, so prepare to take a few days to work. If the spell simply fails but you can recast it the next round, you gained information that the target is under a spell protecting him from being targetted (if it was a succesful saving throw, the spell couldn't be cast for 24h). Try later. Drawback: Team Sorceror could be all under permanent Nondetection. Deduce that he's burning 80 kgp a year on diamond dust. Use Investigation skills to identify such a large scale buyer's business associates. Scry them.


Wtf. That was the biggest metagame I've ever seen. You don't know who your threat is, you think they are the Wizards themselves

Yes. That's why the reasoning assume the unknown enemy is casting wizard spells and not being a god or a creature that actually threw a meteor. It will be a surprise at the end of the investigation that it is not a Wizard.

, you don't know what spell is on them,

Yes, however you know what spells exist, and there are very few that foils divination on the Wizard's list.

much less their components and you don't even know if it's a creature, a deity, a curse or even an ally Wizard.

Yes, it is the point of the investigation to determine it, by scrying whoever is killing people by way of meteors in the outskirts of Candlekeep.

Bastion does not need to buy anything, just steal, loot and kill, after all it is undetectable and most of the time it will be with Mind Blank, which has no cost.

Stealing industrial quantities of diamond dust results in the same. Whether you are buying diamond dust or just attacking the magic shop means that the Cheating One will have to go after a large ones ; offer to ward them against the threat. Make money on the side.

5. Legend Lore

Given the effort of the Sorcerer not to be identified, it could be argued that he isn't of legendary importance. In a "Sorcerer King" scenario, however, where he has already subverted many cities by impersonating wizards doing bad things and then saving key, gullible, people in the last minute and repairing the material damage to become a hero, he would be of legendary importance and would be exposed to information gathering this way. As in "Who is the guy who used immense magic to save King So-and-So?" Drawback: doesn't work in a fledgling ennemy starting his career and who never did something talesworthy. On the other hand, it should work on the level 20 Assassin, since level 20 are planar heroes. You might always get some intersting tidbit, like the place he was last seen.

Again, It's metagame
You don't know who your threat is, you think they are the Wizards themselves, you don't know what spell is on them.
you don't even know if it's a creature, a deity, a curse or even an ally Wizard.

And this has exactly no bearing on the spell.

Their original names are not legendary, nor are assassins who are impostors. Remember, Hidden threat and no declared threat. And again, I am protected against Divination.

No, Legend Lore has a target of self. You are protected against being targetted by divination spells and you are very proud and insistent that the Cheating One and his party doesn't have Mind Blank up all the time.

7. Resurrection

Unless the Sorcerer achieves consistant killing without being seen by its victim, and that means 100% of the time, not even "nearly always" will do, there will be a victim who will have seen him. Resurrect the deceased Wizard and interrogate him. If he isn't cooperative, kill him again and Speak with his skull. Getting information will make the other information gathering venues easier to open.

Again, another DM fiat spell.
"If its soul is free and willing, the target returns to life with all its hit points."

Dead creatures believe they were killed by Wizards' spells.
After all, the last thing they saw was spells from Wizards, like Subtle Meteor Swarm.

It's possible. But as I said, it needs the Cheating One to establish a strategy that allows him to kill without being seen or detected with 100% efficiency. Not 99,9%, really 100%. Which you didn't provide so far.

8. Divination

With the DM having lost any adjudication power, he must provide a truthful answer to an activity to occur in the next seven days. It's limited to an "event, goal or activity", which is pretty narrow. "Will my walk directly east over the next hour make me closer to my the assassin who killed by friend?" is therefore a perfectly valid question. Triangulate as needed.

Again with DM fiat and failed against hidden against Divination.

No, the spell is worded as such ". You ask a single question concerning a specific goal, event, or activity to occur within 7 days. The GM offers a truthful reply." There is no DM fiat: he's by the rules complied to offer a truthful reply. Divination has a range of Self, it doesn't target the Cheating One at any point. Please read the spell descriptions you are commenting on.

9. Summon or be an Invisible Stalker.

Given the shortage of CR 6 air elemental, the DM has no other choice of providing an invisible stalker for a summon. One hour is largely enough to get the information you need, provided you speak Auran. Actually a few rounds of chatting are enough. If the DM cheats by using DM fiat to deny Invisible Stalker, which would be against the rules set up for this contest but has nonetheless been claimed to be the case by SOME participants in the thread, just cast True Polymorph on your pet rock.

Another DM fiat spell and Metagame. Again, you have no idea who your target is.

The only thing you can choose from this spell is CR 6 or lower. The DM will send you an Air Elemental. Unfortunately, you can't choose anything. In fact, if this skill were not DM fiat, Bastion would slay any Wizard very easily, thank you for being DM fiat.

It would be DM fiat to send a creature of lower CR, consistently, when the players is using a higher level slot. I am not surprised that you claim it, though. That's why becoming an Invisible Stalker is the preferred option if the DM is siding with the Cheating One.

When you become an Invisible Stalker, you are no longer you and you have not been summoned, "Flautless Tracker" does not work if you do not summon this creature and you just killed yourself, it doesn’t have a Quarry, it will stop exist.

The eventual death of a pet rock doesn't matter to the Wizard, should it happen. I don't exactly see how suddenly the transformation of a rock into an IS would kill the Wizard but I am adhering to logic. The method of summoning being non specified, doing exactly that will suffice. Or are you trying to implore the DM?

Summary:
Everything, absolutely everything you did is loaded with DM fiat spells/abilities and Metagame. No single tactic you did was really effective against Bastion's defenses.

Summary: failing to provide adequate answer, the Cheating One is quickly located, most notably because he claimed proudly that he "obviously" doesn't have Mind Blank on him and his party all the time.

It is clear that the defeat of the Wizards is imminent.

So far, you failed to provide a legal build, so I am very eager to learn that it is imminent because it's the prerequisite for any defeat or victory. Can you quantify imminent, so we can know when we can actually expect a legal build?

 

[Hohige]

You strategy of calling DM fiat at any strategy you don't like is showing. And not working.




The effects were carefully selected not to rely on DM having to choose anything. Actually its the contrary, some of the spell gives the opportunty for the DM to deny answers. But that's DM fiat, and even if that might be the case in real play, it's explicitely forbidden by the rules you put forth. Unlike you, we're trying to respect the rules of the contest. Including "using D&D".


They don't need to.



No, he can't because you couldn't come up with them. That's why the Cheating One is reduced to randomly walking and casting Meteor Swarm at a one mile distance at every living biped he vaguely see in the distance, then taking a long rest to regenerate his 9th level spell and take two days worth of short rest.



No. Your strategy being to Meteor Swarm at a ONE MILE distance, you can't cover it and stabilize in the three rounds it takes to die (if the Wizard was a PC and not a mere NPC, who don't benefit from death saves).




YES. Receiving "unclear" is totally DM fiat, as evidenced by the fact that the DM "can always veto". And since DM fiat is verboten we must conclude that the DM doesn't use DM fiat and you can ask three questions and MUST receive a correct answer. DM fiat is refusing to answer by RAW.

Cheating One being hidden against divination is an unsubstantiated claim. You established the Cheating One strategy to under constant nondetection, which does that "For the duration, you hide a target that you touch from divination magic. The target can be a willing creature or a place or an object no larger than 10 feet in any dimension. The target can’t be targeted by any divination magic or perceived through magical scrying sensors." Commune has a target of self, it doesn't target the Cheating One. It also doesn't create any "magical scrying sensor". Mind Blank has a much wider application since it "foils spells used [...] to gain information about the target". But you established, several time, that the Cheating One and his party are NOT under constant Mind Blank. You answered that when you claimed to be able to cast Meteor Swarm because "obviously" the Cheating One hadn't cast Mind Blank. So, by your own admission, the spell can work unimpeded and can't be countered without DM fiat.




There is no need to know about the threat. That's the principle of Glyph of Warding: you usually don't know who's going to break in.


You really don't understand math, don't you? Nobody will ever cast it a less than a mile's range from your team...




Yes. That's why the reasoning assume the unknown enemy is casting wizard spells and not being a god or a creature that actually threw a meteor. It will be a surprise at the end of the investigation that it is not a Wizard.




Yes, however you know what spells exist, and there are very few that foils divination on the Wizard's list.



Yes, it is the point of the investigation to determine it, by scrying whoever is killing people by way of meteors in the outskirts of Candlekeep.




Stealing industrial quantities of diamond dust results in the same. Whether you are buying diamond dust or just attacking the magic shop means that the Cheating One will have to go after a large ones ; offer to ward them against the threat. Make money on the side.



And this has exactly no bearing on the spell.



No, Legend Lore has a target of self. You are protected against being targetted by divination spells and you are very proud and insistent that the Cheating One and his party doesn't have Mind Blank up all the time.



It's possible. But as I said, it needs the Cheating One to establish a strategy that allows him to kill without being seen or detected with 100% efficiency. Not 99,9%, really 100%. Which you didn't provide so far.



No, the spell is worded as such ". You ask a single question concerning a specific goal, event, or activity to occur within 7 days. The GM offers a truthful reply." There is no DM fiat: he's by the rules complied to offer a truthful reply. Divination has a range of Self, it doesn't target the Cheating One at any point. Please read the spell descriptions you are commenting on.



It would be DM fiat to send a creature of lower CR, consistently, when the players is using a higher level slot. I am not surprised that you claim it, though. That's why becoming an Invisible Stalker is the preferred option if the DM is siding with the Cheating One.



The eventual death of a pet rock doesn't matter to the Wizard, should it happen. I don't exactly see how suddenly the transformation of a rock into an IS would kill the Wizard but I am adhering to logic. The method of summoning being non specified, doing exactly that will suffice. Or are you trying to implore the DM?




Summary: failing to provide adequate answer, the Cheating One is quickly located, most notably because he claimed proudly that he "obviously" doesn't have Mind Blank on him and his party all the time.



So far, you failed to provide a legal build, so I am very eager to learn that it is imminent because it's the prerequisite for any defeat or victory. Can you quantify imminent, so we can know when we can actually expect a legal build?

"You strategy of calling DM fiat at any strategy you don't like is showing. And not working."


Everything, absolutely everything you try to do is a horrible mix of DM fiat and metagame.


"No, he can't because you couldn't come up with them. That's why the Cheating One is reduced to randomly walking and casting Meteor Swarm at a one mile distance at every living biped he vaguely see in the distance, then taking a long rest to regenerate his 9th level spell and take two days worth of short rest."

I can cast Subtle Meteor Swarm and incriminate wizards freely, don't be sad.


"No. Your strategy being to Meteor Swarm at a ONE MILE distance, you can't cover it and stabilize in the three rounds it takes to die (if the Wizard was a PC and not a mere NPC, who don't benefit from death saves)."

I choose the distance I cast, not you. It has 1mile.
1 mile away, but I am not required to be a mile away, otherwise I will kill the Wizards and not turn them into statues. You failed.

But wait, weren't you the one who said that Bastion wouldn't be able to see the target from this distance?
You were stabilized and killed forever.

"YES. Receiving "unclear" is totally DM fiat, as evidenced by the fact that the DM "can always veto". And since DM fiat is verboten we must conclude that the DM doesn't use DM fiat and you can ask three questions and MUST receive a correct answer. DM fiat is refusing to answer by RAW."

All you absolutely do is DM fiat mixed with Metagame.

"Cheating One being hidden against divination is an unsubstantiated claim. You established the Cheating One strategy to under constant nondetection, which does that "For the duration, you hide a target that you touch from divination magic. The target can be a willing creature or a place or an object no larger than 10 feet in any dimension. The target can’t be targeted by any divination magic or perceived through magical scrying sensors." Commune has a target of self, it doesn't target the Cheating One. It also doesn't create any "magical scrying sensor". Mind Blank has a much wider application since it "foils spells used [...] to gain information about the target". But you established, several time, that the Cheating One and his party are NOT under constant Mind Blank. You answered that when you claimed to be able to cast Meteor Swarm because "obviously" the Cheating One hadn't cast Mind Blank. So, by your own admission, the spell can work unimpeded and can't be countered without DM fiat."

AGAIN??? How long will you ignore the rules?

Do Nondetection and Invisibility protect you from True Seeing?

Nondetection says it hides the target from all divination spells. Invisibility hides you from normal sight. When combining both effects on one target, are they hidden from true seeing?

rpg.stackexchange.com

Does Nondetection plus Invisibility beat True Seeing?

D&D Sage Advice ·

www.sageadvice.eu

Jeremy Crawford:
"The nondetection spell hides you from divination magic. True seeing is a divination spell. #DnD"


Nondetection is hidden against divination. By RAW and RAI. Nobody cares about your opinion.


"Yes, it is the point of the investigation to determine it, by scrying whoever is killing people by way of meteors in the outskirts of Candlekeep."

You failed, the first that Bastion is hidden and the second that it is impossible to determine who cast Subtle Meteor Swarm. Impossible.

Scry doesn't work against Divination immunity spell and you can't see Subtle Meteor Swarm, It's imperceptible for you.
It's SUBTLE SPELL.

You may be talking to him, in front of him. He casts Subtle Meteor Swarm and you won't know who cast.


I will not continue to answer. Everything, absolutely everything you do is DM fiat with metagame and simply ignoring rules like Nondetection that hides you against Divination. Here is your fault, you depend on misinterpretations and clearly exposed here that you are wrong and with a great mix of DM fiat and metagame.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Oh, good, Sage Advice is now back to being considered. That puts a stop to the resting for sorcery points without relying on DM fiat:

 

[Hohige]

The Sorcerer is completely protected against any attempt to investigate.
According to Xanathar's rules.
Subtle Spell does not let you know who is casting the spell and if the spell has no visual effect, it is impossible to detect that spell.

As simple as that, Subtle Meteor Swarm can kill you and you will never know you cast.
In addition to allowing a Stealth casting without revealing the caster.
It's the best class feature of the game.

In addition to Hidden against Divination, it is not possible to discover anything about the real threat.