Yeah, I am SUPER hyped up, especially because of the hints of what's happening next (I've read some of Matt's notes, but won't spoil them), and I can't wait for tonight. Long live the chain.

Ja, I can agree with the hype it builds for Wednesday. Especially after a week off!

I love the diaries on Wednesday! It’s the only day of the week I have a 30-40 minute commute, and they come out right before I get on the road home. Great way to spend a scenic drive.

iM drunjlhd

">There is a jump cut and Matt's hair is different" Oh my god yes XD

he has awesome hair, but I think he would look even more awesome bald

Change drinking to smoking and I’m in lol

@@hawkeyegough8586 I had notifications turned off and I only just saw this!

Stealing that one! XD

Bodak Horseman

B O D A K Y E L L OW

:) good one! 😂

Phil Spectre certainly

Piotr Bartosiak grand theft adventuring

Chris Durbak like a two headed, two tailed, bifurcated snake?

This wait had been soooo long! I've been refreshing and watching old videos!

Speaking of crossovers, did Mercer hire "The Chain" to help protect the Empire?

My players started in a small walled town in the Northeast of the map in my game called Greyhaven. They found that the local Lord, Lord Louton, has lost his son. He went into the woods on a hunting trip nearby, but the party went missing. They came into the town and overheard that the Lord was gathering men to go our and search for his son, and was offering 500 gp for his safe return. The two were put into the same search party and found a clearing with obvious signs of blood, and a survivor from the party. From there they determined that the scene they found might not have been where the Lord's son Garret went missing, and the seeming only survivor, Seargent Sterrin, is seemingly not as injured as everyone thinks. They go back to the town on the orders of the Lord's brother, Chamberlain Graves. They find back at the tavern that the Lord's brother is not well liked, and that he has seemed very callous to the loss of his nephew. They party then infiltrated the castle and overheard a woman talking to an unseen man about removing Sterrin from the situation. They arrived at Sterrin's home to find a young boy who they discovered was a plant to lure away anyone that might go to Sterrin's home for answers. They interrogated him and ultimately let him go. They then found Sterrin in the woods about to be murdered and defended him from his would be killers. They then found out that he had been paid by an unknown party to lead Garret to the cave of a locally feared monster (a Jotun, or smallish giant). There they went in and Sterrin, redeeming himself, fought alongside them and nearly died killing the beast and saving Garret just before death. So far that's the end, but next week I'm s excited to finish this story and move on to the next!

@@SophiaAphroditethat seems unnecessary, don't you think?

That is... really cool and I've never thought of it before. I might try this.

​@discoandherpes It's not that we feel like we need to buff casters, it's that we feel like the "no bonus action + action cast" NERF to casters is strangely written, so we're trying to re-phrase the nerf in a way that feels more natural without making casters objectively more powerful. In the version suggested by OP, casters can't put out any more total spell levels (and hence damage) per turn than in vanilla, but do so in a more fluid feeling way so that they can split their spell levels between action and bonus action. Specifically, the idea of this house rule is to NOT buff casters, while making the way they work less weird. I don't want to buff casters either, because I like martial characters.

​@discoandherpes 1) It feels weird to me and it's my fun. If I think it will feel more fun to play that way, then that's... that's a good reason to try it. If I try it and it turns out I'm wrong, then that's... that's a good reason to stop. 2) Well, I'll try it out and see, but my initial impression is that the way that houserule cuts down on the power of the dual-cast spells should counter the weight of being able to cast twice. (Ok, let's math it. Picking the first two spells I can think of... a level 5 Cleric casts Guiding Bolt as an action at 3rd level. The target suffers 6d6 (21) radiant and the next attack against it has advantage. Instead, using our houserule, the cleric splits the cast between a 1st level Guiding Bolt and a 2nd level Spiritual Weapon. This time, the target takes 4d6 (14) radiant, plus the Sprirtual Weapon attack, dealing 1d8+3 (8.5) force. 22.5 damage this time. Not a noticeable increase, BUT the second attack roll had advantage, so maybe that is a significant enough power increase that we'd need to rule something like "the two spells hit at the same time, so you can't combo"). I said it seemed cool and I would try it in a game and find out if it did the desired thing (make the nerf more fluid without removing it). I might find out it's worse, then I won't use it. The AIM is certainly not to buff casters and if it ends up doing that... I wouldn't keep using it.

discoandherpes in the Tal’Dorei campaign setting there is a feat which is meant for that world but eh, Spelldriver, can do multiple spells, but only one can be 3rd level or higher and I think other restrictions still apply. Wouldn’t help these guys though because it doesn’t kick in till 8th level.

@discoandherpes I've never played any other editions, so how come I find it weird?

This is correct. Clarification on Action Surge - You can use action Surge to cast two spells of level 1 or higher...as long as neither of them is a bonus action spell. There is no rule restricting the casting of multiple spells with a casting time of 1 action on the same turn (assuming you've somehow gained the extra action of course.) Theoretically, if you had 10 actions in the same turn then you could cast 10 spells of level 1 or higher that have a casting time of 1 action. However, as soon as you use one of those actions to cast a spell of level 1 or higher then you become locked out of using a bonus action to cast a spell for that whole turn. Likewise, if you had 10 actions and you started out by first using your bonus action to cast a spell, then you become locked out of using any of your 10 actions to cast a spell of level 1 or higher. Here's are examples: "Can I misty step (bonus action), fire bolt (action) and fireball (action surge) on same turn?" - The fireball couldn't happen because you have already cast a bonus action spell. The additional action from action surge would have to be a cantrip. "Can I fireball (action) and fireball (action surge) then misty step (bonus action), on same turn?" - You could cast two fireballs no problem, but the misty step couldn't happen because you already used an action to cast a spell of level 1 or higher.

Hey, it's something a lot of players never consider. What if you're just straight-up honest? So many players have their PCs reflexively lie and keep secrets when there is no actual reason for them to do so.

I disagree with that. It's pretty much cheating. Legendary Actions and Lair Actions are ways within the rules to give BBEGs extra actions. If that's not enough, throw in some sidekicks or summoned creatures. Just giving a BBEG multiple turns per round essentially destroys the players' ability to strategise. Basically, it's the referee changing the rules to give his "team" a better chance to win.

Nick Williams I see lair actions as more of an incentive to try and ambush or lure the BB into a trap. A reward for clever play or being bold and risking a fight with the BB a little early. The issue with legendary actions is that they run out and even a small party should be able to outpace them if they’re on similar footing. I think the issue with multiple turns is that it refreshes their reactions and will cut the duration of status effects. All of which, the party can still plan around. I don’t see why (except maybe outside the first turn for the shock value) the players would be unable to plan around it as long as there’s consistency. One BB that has multiple turns would probably still be easier than a few bad guys with their own initiatives since you can still focus fire and chain-cc the BB, while a group has a better ability to rally, support one another, and turn the tide against the PCs.

Yep, [casting a spell of level 1 or higher as an action] and [casting a spell as a bonus action] are mutually exclusive. They cannot happen on the same turn, regardless of the casting order, class features, spells effects, etc. If you follow the logic of the RAW you can arrive there, but it would have been so much easier if they just dropped it in there plainly.

Exactly. which means you cast frost bolt (cantrip) as your action - then cast another spell like Divine Favor(1st lvl) as a Bonus action. (comment to leave an example)

@@mykediemart exactly

A reaction is exempt anyway bc it isn't done on your turn

@@murdeoc I understand where your coming from but you can take reactions on your turn. I'm citing page 190. There are effects, spells ect that happen on a players turn that can be reacted to with a reaction. my thought above was along this thinking i edited it because of what you pointed out.

Hehehehehe. Yeah that doesn’t sound like a good idea

@@dittmar104 yea after last night's episode I feel the error of my ways lol

As he said, he will be with the party at least for a time...

Who are we talkin about here? The courier?

@@monosito59 Absolutely. I don't see a more dramatic outcome for their easily granted trust than betrayal.

@@tyrthelawful3855 The emaciated kid they found in the catacombs? I mean unless he's one of them springtrap bois I don't see him being much of a threat. But if he does manage to dupe them, I'll be the first one clapping lol

@@tyrthelawful3855 dramatic yes, but that will inevitably mean that Matt won't have his players trusting another NPC ever again. I think it would be a huge tactical mistake to have him betray the Chain. Out of game that is.

My disappointment is not on my behalf, its on behalf of the players. It's the monsters abilities, not their hit points, that make fights fun and interesting.

​@@mcolville, I have to imagine you're at least a little disappointed for your own sake (just purely in terms of it being fun to play bad guys doing bad stuff), but I take your point that that wasn't what you were talking about. My point is that, i think, what players miss out on in a single encounter being trivial here and there they gain back twofold in an increased sense of tension when things go poorly. When the sine wave of fate dips too strongly in their favor that they breeze through an encounter, it makes it feel more appropriate when it later dips so strongly in the other direction that it leaves lasting negative consequences for them or their ambitions. Edit: I'm worried the back and forth nature of comments like this can make it seem like I'm trying to challenge your take on what happened in your own game. I hope not. I've just been thinking a lot about this exact thing recently and felt like I had something to add to the conversation.

​@@mcolville I was thinking you were taking it kind of easy on them considering how much of a threat Bodaks usually are. If worse came to worse the librarians could've always come down and rescued them. Then I heard what you had planned for the next session. Yikes!

Yup. It's simple. If you cast a numbered-level spell with your action, you can only cast a cantrip with your bonus action. If you cast a numbered-level spell with your bonus action, you can only cast a cantrip with your action. Not "noodly". Not complex. Not hard to understand. Absolutely straightforward.

@@nickwilliams8302 Funny you say that, because part of your message is wrong. You can't cast a numbered-level spell as your action, then a cantrip as your bonus action, because BA casting rule applies. You can Quickened Fireball then Fire Bolt, but you can't Fireball then Quickened Fire Bolt.

@@jhinpotion9230 Ah, my mistake. The BA casting rule means that if you use a bonus action to cast _any_ spell, you can only cast a cantrip with your action.

Yeah slim will begin to fall off until level eleven when he gets extra attack 2 and spikes back up

I would argue that the drama of anticipating a slower written response is actually more emotionally effective, plus Matt managed to write it in a way where the reader could easily recognise that it was Angel speaking, and that the situation was dire.

ebmusicman84 And to clarify on the Attack action it only allows for one weapon attack.

Like a lozenge.