Kenkus can only use words they've heard before. This implies that other races aren't limited like that, and automatically know all the words in their language. So you can't just make up words.
- Posts
- 1
- Comments
- 517
- Joined
- 3 yr. ago
- Posts
- 1
- Comments
- 517
- Joined
- 3 yr. ago
So I've heard. There probably are other languages that could work. ChatGPT says polysynthetic languages like Inuktitut, Mohawk, and Chukchi do. I don't have time to double check, but I'm sure if ChatGPT's wrong there are other examples where it's true.
Unfortunately, in 2025 they closed the loophole. You only can use the listed commands. And I notice the loophole didn't work for sending in either version of 5e (or in 3.5). It specifies a "short" message of 25 words or less, so while you could compress an arbitrarily long message into a single word (though possibly having to use some Morse code-type deal) it wouldn't help because it wouldn't be a "short" message.
One could argue that it's only indirectly harmful. It's not jumping out of the window that hurts you. It's the sudden stop before you reach the ground. Or more realistically, you could argue that even taking a little falling damage, you're in a way better position than fighting for your life, so on the net it's not harmful.
Or you could just use it on a Monk.
But then you have to give up one of your attacks to move or do anything else that takes an action. On the other hand, when you have different types of actions, it feels like a waste when you have one you haven't used but there's nothing even slightly useful you can do with it.
Pathfinder deals with it by giving you three actions, but the second attack is at a -5 penalty and the third is at -10, so you're not giving up much by using one of your actions to move. It is a complication, but I think it's useful. Though I think I'd prefer something a bit lighter on the rules.
when combined with actual eye injuries
Doesn’t take much for memetics to kick in
That alone is enough to explain our observations (the trope).
So, to summarize your point, if this happened but not very often, it wouldn't leave any evidence. We have no evidence, therefore it must have happened, just not very often.
It's still a huge stretch to go from "this could possibly work, but there's no evidence that it was ever used besides sailors often being drawn with eyepatches" to "ever single sailor on the ship wore an eyepatch, and everyone forgot why and also depicted most sailors as not having eyepatches for some reason".
Related question: What's the difference between an airplane and the Plane of Air?
They used their free object interaction to pick up the tile. They'd need another action to eat it. Though going by that logic, they could just eat it at the beginning of their next turn with the same result.
Everyone remembers the part in Mythbusters where they proved this is possible. Nobody remembers the part where they found no evidence of it ever happening.
Also, the eye patch trope was originally for sailors in general. Which would make sense if this is what it was used for, since all sailors would need night vision, but that just means it's even crazier that nobody would bother to write it down.
They used deck prisms to see below decks. That would give you plenty of light during the day, and during the night your eyes are already adjusted to the dark.
You fill their lungs up. It was creative the first time, but it's a very well-known shenanigan at this point. 3.5 had a specific note in Create Water: Conjuration spells can’t create substances or objects within a creature.
I wouldn't call those homebrew. They don't have new rules that are consistently followed. It's more just allowing Rule of Cool. I really hope typical D&D allows the occasional shenanigan.
but you won’t call that being “genderfluid”, as having a “locked” gender may seems weird to them.
And I would say that someone who has always been female and happens to have a male body as having a "locked" gender. I just use "cis" to mean that your gender matches your sex. Not anything about whether or not your gender is fixed.
My understanding is that gender is how you think of yourself. If you consider yourself to be a man, then regardless of what society says, you're a man. They can't simply assign you the gender of woman. The terms AMAB and AFAB are referring to your sex, not your gender.
Trans is not just about your body, but also about how everyone and the society percieve you (that’s why you have multiple type of coming out).
So if someone was born male, and thinks of themselves as female, but they haven't told anyone, would you say that they're cisgender because the gender society perceives them as matches their birth sex?
So if you have a male body, but your gender is and has always been female, you're cis?
Cis just means your gender matches your sex, right? If your sex is fluid, and you're cis, what gender would that be?
I don't know the lore. Reading the wiki page, it looks like he used to be genderfluid, but now is generally male. And it sounds like he's a god that can just naturally change sex, so he's cis-genderfluid. Which I guess means now he's trans?
I'd be more afraid of an anti-gravity belt that is an anti-inertia belt. It would reverse gravity, which would normally cause you to fall up, except it also reverses your inertia so you still go down. But if you push on the floor, the floor will push back up on you, which will cause you to accelerate towards the floor. You'd probably end up fused into it.
I'm really not seeing how one that isn't an anti-inertia belt is a problem, besides breaking general relativity. If you turn the anti-gravity way up the acceleration could kill you, but I'd think of that as too much anti-gravity instead of lack of inertial dampening.
A pureblood elf that looks like a human is raised by dwarves, learns to fight, befriends goblins, and gets super rich.