Sure, but that is not what we are talking about here, we are talking about 10 out of 10.
Okay. Rogues are better 10 out of 10. I was giving wizards a 1 in 10 chance of being better at dex because of bladesingers and rolled stats, but...
There are chaotic alingments and multiple shady backgrounds including one even called criminal which are in the PHB. So even if it is illegal to charm someone in your world (and it is not in most civilizations in the most common D&D world), even in that corner case though, there are still specific character options designed for characters to have a predicliction not to follow such laws.
I disagree that chaotic alignments are about breaking the law. They are more about individuals, rather than group. That said, if someone with say a criminal background engages in criminal activity as an adventurer, they can and likely will run afoul of the law.
It is a bit silly to talk about realism in a world with dragons and wizards, but even so. The point is this, most people do not play D&D like you seem to. In most D&D campaigns "mind raping" someone as you call it is legal.
Overlooked by the DM more like it. There's nothing rational about a country or city allowing mind control magic to be used on its citizens, law enforcement and nobility.
As for realism in a fantasy game. Each and every last fantasy game ever written has realism in it. The degree will vary, but it's there. D&D is no exception.
I will add that there was a D&D novel set in Halruaa where one of the LEADERS of the country actually did just that and they even called it similar in the novel saying the victim was "violated" by his intrusion into her mind. But this was a "civilized" society, a city in fact and it was totally LEGAL.
Leaders tend to exempt themselves. As well as law enforcement. Which I mentioned several posts ago as exceptions to the illegality.
So rules and laws only apply sometimes or only to certain groups of people?
This is strange to you? The rich often get away with literal murder in the real world. And lesser crimes even more often or with far lighter sentences than you or I would get. Hell, up until like 10 years ago, it was legal for U.S. Congress to engage in insider trading, but illegal for the rest of us.
But what I was talking about in context is that 1) in the middle of nowhere you aren't going to get reported, and 2) often the middle of nowhere is outside of any country and no laws apply.
What abotu if it is impossible if he is not charmed. For example a stranger probably can't be convinced to loan me some money or comp me a meal, a stranger who is guarding the castle probably can't be convinced to let you in, a "friendly acquintance" might be able to be convinced to do either.
A friendly acquaintance probably isn't going to loan you money or comp you a meal, either. A friendly acquaintance is just some guy you see every few months at a friend's party and talk to for a bit. You don't hang out. You don't do favors for each other. You're just acquainted with one another and get along at the party. I say probably, because certain personalities and alignments would be likely to do something like that, but then they're also the ones that give charity meals to people and volunteer to help the poor, so they'd likely do it for a stranger, too.
He is gauranteed to know about it 8 hours later, but he is not likely to report it before that.
Done is done. The authorities are now after you. It makes no matter to me if it's 8 hours later.
He is also likely to find out the Rogue is lying and if he doesnt do it with the insight check, it will probably be sooner than 8 hours.
This just isn't true. People don['t have access to Google, massive libraries or networks of sages to figure out if you were lying. Depending on the circumstances it's possible, but most of the time you aren't going to be caught. And if you are, well lying ISN'T illegal the vast majority of the time. Defrauding someone would be different.
Ok I am not sure you understand the stealth rules. You have to be completely obscured to try to hide. Invisibilty takes care of that and it is the only condition to try. The stealth roll essentially determines if you are "unheard".
Yes, I know. But you aren't getting advantage on that and wizards as a general rule, are not stealthy. They take arcana, investigation and other skills that they are actually good at. Exceptions exist, but it's not a wizard thing to be stealthy. 39 years of playing D&D and never once have I heard, "You can add wizard to the list of stealthy classes."
Similarly the Rogue trying to hide has to be completely obscured (unseen) before he tries to hide.
Which generally isn't hard, especially in dim light where creatures can easily miss you while you are just standing out in the open.
I am not, but you you keep assuming there is something to hide behind.
Because the vast majority of rooms have something to hide behind. Very few are just barren.
Potentially sure and the Rogue is limited to those arteas. The wizard can try to hide anywhere in the room.
Okay. The rogue can hide 24 hours a day. The wizard gets what? 1-4 hours depending on level? That's massively worse than 24/7 like the rogue can do.
not according to the rules. If the enemy has darkvision he is not fully obscured and there is no possibility that the enemy misses him.
Dim light creates a lightly obscured area. Obscurement puts seeing something or someone in doubt. The rule is that you can't hide from someone who can see you
clearly. It's impossible to clearly see someone in dim light. It is by definition lightly obscured. The rule is further that "The DM decides when circumstances are appropriate for hiding." So since it's in doubt that you are seen, if the one with darkvision fails the perception check to see you, then you are out of sight and can hide.
The wood elf ability allows them to hide in light obscurement even when seen, but that ability by no means says that they are the only one that can hide in light obscurement. The sage advice clarifies that.
The enemy ALWAYS sees him RAW. The dim light would pose disadvantage on perception checks involving sight, but that is more or less irrelevant to hiding because to try to hide he can't be able to see you AT ALL.
Show me the rule that says that. Because the above rules are all in play and allow for someone to not be seen in dim light, even if not behind anything.
Now if you have a special ability at play - say the skulker feat - then yes you could try to hide in just dim light and he would in fact have disadvantage because of the dim light condition. But without the feat or the Wood Elf ability RAW it is impossible to hide in a room against somoene with darkvision if you can't get behind something so it is impossible for him to see you.
From what I can see anyone can hide in light obscurement when the DM by RAW decides they can.
Enough. Every slot wasted reduces your ability to try and match another class.
For your 2 points in constitution to matter for concentration you need to take damage and fail by the check by 1 point. How many times is that going to happen a day? Less than once a day, particularly if you invest in defense to avoid hits in the first place.
Not often. I keep telling people who try and say that you need an 18 or 20 that, but very few listen.
Likewise on getting knocked out. If my 6th level Wizard has 26 hps and yours has 32 points the enemy needs to do more than 26 but less than 32 for this to matter. That will happen occasionally, but not very often and to be honest getting knocked out is not that big a deal. Finally, for the cost of one 1st level slot I can give myself more hps than you for an entire hour while also having higher abilities 24-7 .... or 24-10 on Ferun.
A whole hour? It's a good thing that the 6-8 encounters are balanced around the adventuring hour.
I'd rather have the 6 hit points 24/7, which do make a difference much more often than the +1 to concentration. The odds of all or even most of the encounters happening in the hour or two that you cast the spell once or twice are slim. Hell, you could end up with most or all of the encounters happening without you being able to prep in advance, so you could be wasting the spell entirely.
So what is the actual slot cost to be just as durable in combat as a wizard with 2 more points of con? Probably on average about 2 1st level slots a day at 6th level and 2 2nd level slots at 10th level, 2 3rd level slots at 15th level etc.
For a few fights. If you want it in all 6-8 fights it will be significantly more slots.
When 5e first came out I used to try to buff con on my wizards and then I realized how dumb that was and how much a character is with a high dex and a decent wisdom or charisma.
That's a viable preference for sure. It's subjective, though. That's what you prefer and like, other people will want the con for the steady hit points over all encounters, the con saves, and any con ability checks. Neither opinion is wrong.
An invisible character is going to have far more places to hide than a non-invisible character, far more. An invisible character can hide literally anywhere, the number of places with something to hide behind are comparatively few.
Sure, but only for a really limited amount of the day. The rogue can hide 24/7 since there are usually places to hide. He's not limited to the few hours he is invisible, and I rarely see invisibility go the full hour. Usually a combat happens and the wizard does something offensive, or he wants to cast a different concentration spell, or whatever.
