[Movie] Dungeon & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves

[Fabinas]

It is literally the first class skill they get at level 1, and the one thing that sets the class apart from others, while 6 out of the 12 base classes get spellcasting at first level.

- - - Updated - - -



Giving out bardic inspiration doesn't require the bard to play their lute. Read the rules.

He gives out bardic inspiration to the sorcerer so he can pass the ability check to attune with the helmet.

Thanks. I am not asking more how this is implemented in the movie to avoid more spoilers.

[Gabriel]

If you wanna talk about words, its says "You can inspire others through stirring words or music. " so they use in the ability checks

Can you point out, how he did that? how he inspired someone so they succeed at something? cause even with the helmet the sorcerer did alone.... He just do the normal emocional speech every movie have, and some persuasion checks, thats it, rogue thief with the lute proficiency, expertise in persuasion and deception.

Yes, thats literally it. He gave the sorcerer bardic inspiration so he could pass his skill check. No, you can't give bonus or advantage to your allies with a persuasion check.

HE ACTUALY DOES!

Holy shit, there is, it think two or three times, where he sneak behind the wizard and bump her in the head with the lute! or seize an opening his friend gives to bump her in the head again, you just brought another proof how he is in fact a rogue! one that even i forgot.

Sneak attacks require you to use a finesse or a ranged weapon for the attack. RAW A lute is an improvised weapon, so it cannot be used for sneak attacks.

[Corvus]

If you want to argue he isn't a bard, you could just say he wasn't trying to sleep with everything that moved, because as anyone who has played the games knows, that is the defining archetype of a bard.

[Gabriel]

If you want to argue he isn't a bard, you could just say he wasn't trying to sleep with everything that moved, because as anyone who has played the games knows, that is the defining archetype of a bard.

I was sort of expecting him to try to seduce the dragon for the ultimate bard joke tbh.

[Syegfryed]

Yes, thats literally it. He gave the sorcerer bardic inspiration so he could pass his skill check.

He didn't, because he kept failing, lmao. Only later he was able to attune, by itself, and if you want to be so strict about "rules" you are ignoring how bard inspiration is for ability checks, and not to someone attune an item

Sneak attacks require you to use a finesse or a ranged weapon for the attack. RAW A lute is an improvised weapon, so it cannot be used for sneak attacks.

His finesse weapon was in the shape of a lute, totally raw to reflavour stuff like that.

Plus, just remembered another bit, The thief subclass ability "Use Magic Device" allows him to use any magical item, ignoring race or class requirement, and he does just i n the final, by using the item to revive his friend

The more we talk the more we prove he was, indeed, a rogue.

- - - Updated - - -

If you want to argue he isn't a bard, you could just say he wasn't trying to sleep with everything that moved, because as anyone who has played the games knows, that is the defining archetype of a bard.

Like i said, things keep proving he was a rogue its just one more stuff on the plate.

ITs going to be a shock for some people after seeing how Scanlan portray the real bard in the vox machina animation, i have to re-watch if i can spot any reference to critical role.


Plus, the dnd part from the old cartoon, if anyone is interest in spoilers they actually survive, and "win" the competition, by getting to the safe place first, so a plus for that

[Gabriel]

He didn't, because he kept failing, lmao. Only later he was able to attune, by itself, and if you want to be so strict about "rules" you are ignoring how bard inspiration is for ability checks, and not to someone attune an item

He attuned to it only after the Bard gave him bardic inspiration to beat the Charisma check that he had to make since he was in conflict with the will of the Sentient Magic Item. Watch the movie and read the rules.


D&D Dungeons Master's Guide page 216.

His finesse weapon was in the shape of a lute, totally raw to reflavour stuff like that.

You can't reflavor a musical instrument as a finesse weapon, since it already has an item classification (instrument or in Bard's case, spell casting focus). An instrument is an improvised weapon if used for a melee attack. Furthermore, by RAW there are no finesse weapons that deal blunt damage, which banging something with a lute does.

Plus, just remembered another bit, The thief subclass ability "Use Magic Device" allows him to use any magical item, ignoring race or class requirement, and he does just i n the final, by using the item to revive his friend

That would be only useful if the magic item in question had restrictions on who could use it.

And if he was a thief rogue, why didn't HE use the helmet?

The more we talk the more we prove he was, indeed, a rogue.

The more we talk the more you prove how stupid you are.

[Syegfryed]

He attuned to it only after the Bard gave him bardic inspiration to beat the Charisma check that he had to make since he was in conflict with the will of the Sentient Magic Item. Watch the movie and read the rules.

He literally failed all the time he was with the Rogue, when the rogue was saying he could do it. The only time he attuned, was by itself, with not help and def without bardic inspiration.
.

You can't reflavor a musical instrument as a finesse weapon

Rule zero

you want to talk about "raw" but only when its convenient for you. Raw bards do spells and cantrips as well, but alas

And if he was a thief rogue, why didn't HE use the helmet?

Better for the sorcerer who is descendant of the great wizard to do it, obviously, plus, being able to use doesn't mean he could use well enough, compared to a full on spellcaster.

The more we talk the more you prove how stupid you are.

Waow there m8, you can't resort to personal attacks just because you are wrong.

Either way, things are on the table, i don't need to prove myself further, you can get the final reply

[Gabriel]

He literally failed all the time he was with the Rogue, when the rogue was saying he could do it. The only time he attuned, was by itself, with not help and def without bardic inspiration.

Bardic inspiration lasts for 10 minutes after the bard gives it to you.

Rule zero

you want to talk about "raw" but only when its convenient for you. Raw bards do spells and cantrips as well, but alas

You can't evoke Rule Zero if you try to push your stupid idea that by RAW he is a rogue instead of a bard. And literally nothing in the rules says that a bard must use spells.

Better for the sorcerer who is descendant of the great wizard to do it, obviously, plus, being able to use doesn't mean he could use well enough, compared to a full on spellcaster.

Pretty cool that we have the exact canon item descriptions then, huh?


Tablet of Reawakening
Wondrous Item, Legendary

Witches of Rashemen created this Tiny stone tablet to counter the necromancy of the Red Wizards. As an action, you can cast true resurrection from the tablet. Once used in this way, the tablet turns to dust and is destroyed.

Notice how it doesn't have restrictions on who can use it, and that it doesn't involve an ability check, so it literally would not work any different if the sorcerer used it?

Waow there m8, you can't resort to personal attacks just because you are wrong.

Either way, things are on the table, i don't need to prove myself further, you can get the final reply

You are an annoying troll, so I call you out as such.

[Syegfryed]

Bardic inspiration lasts for 10 minutes after the bard gives it to you.

Ok, now go on and count how many minutes passed in real time form the movie, i will wait.

You can't evoke Rule Zero if you try to push your stupid idea that by RAW he is a rogue instead of a bard. And literally nothing in the rules says that a bard must use spells.

You are the one bringing up raw mate, i never did that, because if we are going raw by the fifth edition, there is a fuckton of stuff that is wrong, how dare they act before the others in the initiative? your conversation make no sense, he is a rogue because he was a rogue in the early script, he does rogue stuff, he was part of a rogue-ish organization,, he does the thief ability of fast hands, he even does some sneak attack, and yet, he does no magic, no cantrips, and no, he doesn't use "bard inspiration" is straight up persuasion check.

Pretty cool that we have the exact canon item descriptions then, huh?

Ineed, and look at that:
https://www.dndbeyond.com/magic-item...of-disjunction

The helm does not require any ability check, so your entire argument about bardic inspiration to attune the item becomes invallid

You are an annoying troll, so I call you out as such.

Soo i guess you earned your report fo breaking froum rules.

[Gabriel]

Ok, now go on and count how many minutes passed in real time form the movie, i will wait.


You are the one bringing up raw mate, i never did that, because if we are going raw by the fifth edition, there is a fuckton of stuff that is wrong, how dare they act before the others in the initiative? your conversation make no sense, he is a rogue because he was a rogue in the early script, he does rogue stuff, he was part of a rogue-ish organization,,

The fuck are you talking about? He was part of The Harpers that is a majority bard organization. Their goddamned logo is a harp.

he does the thief ability of fast hands, he even does some sneak attack, and yet, he does no magic, no cantrips, and no, he doesn't use "bard inspiration" is straight up persuasion check.

You still can't use an improvised weapon for sneak attacks, and you still can't give your allies a bonus to anything with a persuasion check.

Ineed, and look at that:
https://www.dndbeyond.com/magic-item...of-disjunction

The helm does not require any ability check, so your entire argument about bardic inspiration to attune the item becomes invallid

It is not using the helm that requires the ability check, but trying to force a Sentient Magic Item to allow you to attune to it against its will, moron.

A Charisma Check is an Ability Check.

Soo i guess you earned your report fo breaking froum rules.

Go ahead.

[Syegfryed]

The fuck are you talking about? He was part of The Harpers that is a majority bard organization. Their goddamned logo is a harp.

The organization have many classes:

Most members of the Harpers lived their lives as resourceful rangers or captivating bards, though some dashing rogues, mighty wizards, stalwart fighters and clerics of benevolent deities served as wel

But the organization is rogue-ish as it is an outlaw/robind hood kinda of thing:

was a semi-secret organization dedicated to preserving historical lore, maintaining the balance between nature and civilization, and defending the innocent from the forces of evil across the Realms

You still can't use an improvised weapon for sneak attacks, and you still can't give your allies a bonus to anything with a persuasion check.

You can use improvised weapons for sneak attacks, if the dm allow it, rule zero, you can flavour a finesse weapon as a instrument, and yes, you can give a bonus to your allies, Help action.

It is not using the helm that requires the ability check, but trying to force a Sentient Magic Item to allow you to attune to it against its will, moron.

The item is not sentient, you literally brought up the "canon item description", there is no requirement of any ability check to attune or to allow the item to be attuned

[Gabriel]

You can use improvised weapons for sneak attacks, if the dm allow it, rule zero, you can flavour a finesse weapon as a instrument,

So your argument is basically that anything that goes against your theory of Ed being a rogue is just because muh rule zero and DM fiat? Cool, got it.

and yes, you can give a bonus to your allies, Help action.

Help action grants your ally an advantage on the roll provided that it makes the check before the start of your next turn.

So when you said that the sorcerer was alone when he finally attuned to the helmet, and that it was (in your opinion) more than 10 minutes since he saw Ed (the time limit for how long a bardic inspiration lasts), was it before the end of Ed's turn (a round of combat lasts roughly 6 seconds), and does taking the Help Action require you to make a persuasion check?

The item is not sentient,

It quite literally is since it has a personality that refuses to let the sorcerer to attune to it. Read the rules.

you literally brought up the "canon item description", there is no requirement of any ability check to attune or to allow the item to be attuned

It doesn't have to have the requirement in the item description. A Sentient Magic Item is an NPC under the DM's control. A Sentient Magic Item could tell you to shove it up your ass before it agrees to let you use its magic, if you don't do what the Sentient Magic Item wants you to do, you get into conflict with its will and have to win an opposed Charisma check against the item's Charisma check.

...And none of this has to be written in the item description since it is entirely up to the DM how they roleplay the item's personality.

[Rocksteady 87]

HE ACTUALY DOES!

Holy shit, there is, it think two or three times, where he sneak behind the wizard and bump her in the head with the lute! or seize an opening his friend gives to bump her in the head again, you just brought another proof how he is in fact a rogue! one that even i forgot.

Oh, I'm so sorry dude, but if he was FIGHTING someone that makes him a FIGHTER, actshully, using your idiotic rules. The same goes for anyone else who engaged in a FIGHT. I mean, like <obnoxious snort while pushing fake glasses up nose>, FIGHT is literally in the name of the class. Ergo, only Fighters are allowed to fight. Duh.

So the whole movie is just wrong and not doing D&D right!!111



- - - Updated - - -

Wizards are proficient with spells as well you know, which she used a lot, look, the class doing SOMETHING from their toolkit.

our comparison is the wizard class not using one of their weapon proficiency, to the bard not using A SINGLE THING in their entire repertoire.

Bard.

Lookit all that stuff aside from spells, many of which were displayed in the movie. But alas, no! He was clearly a FIGHTER because he was FIGHTing!!!11111one

Also, +10 to the "I'm intentionally ignorant" scorecard for cutting out all of the links and related information of bards and other spell-less classes throughout D&D in your post, then acting all FOX News "well, where are the links and other information on this sort of thing?!" bullshit.

[Syegfryed]

It quite literally is since it has a personality that refuses to let the sorcerer to attune to it. Read the rules.

https://www.dndbeyond.com/magic-item...of-disjunction

Read the item, literally says its not an sentient magic item. The whole bit about the item not being able to attune was the sorcerer having doubt of himself.

[Gabriel]

https://www.dndbeyond.com/magic-item...of-disjunction

Read the item, literally says its not an sentient magic item.

It literally does not. None of the example sentient magic items in the DMG have "sentient magic item" listed as an attribute under the item's name, as it doesn't have to be explicitly stated.

What is explicitly shown however, is the item having a sentience since it actively engages in dialog with the sorcerer who attempts to attune to it.

The whole bit about the item not being able to attune was the sorcerer having doubt of himself.

So the thing with the sorcerer being blown away the distance of tens of feet when he tried to put on the helmet and failing to convince the image of the wizard that he was worthy of using the helmet, was just him jumping really far backwards for fun because he didn't want to attune to it? Man, you have a lot of bad takes.

[Syegfryed]

It literally does not. None of the example sentient magic items in the DMG have "sentient magic item" listed as an attribute under the item's name, as it doesn't have to be explicitly stated.

Except, you know,this is false, all of the sentient magic items in the dmg say they are sentinent in their description, unlike this helmet

As examples of sentient magic itens we have:
Whelm: "Sentience. Whelm is a sentient lawful neutral weapon with an Intelligence of 15, a Wisdom of 12, and a Charisma of 15." pg 218
Wave: Sentience. Wave is a sentient weapon of neutral alignment, with an Intelligence of 14, a Wisdom of 10, and a Charisma of 18. pg 218
Blackrazor: Sentience. Blackrazor is a sentient chaotic neutral weapon with an Intelligence of 17, a Wisdom of 10, and a Charisma of 19. pg 218

What is explicitly shown however, is the item having a sentience since it actively engages in dialog with the sorcerer who attempts to attune to it.

Baiscally, you want to use the canon item description for the tablet, because it fits your argument, but you are straight up ignoring the description of the helmet, because it refutes your argument, got it.

And the whole bit is, that there was no "spirit" no sentience, when the old guy turns into him, it was just him fighting with himself, because he had no confidence

Its the whole development arc of the sorcerer he doesn't believe in himself as a true sorcerer, he have doubts and fears, hence, he was not able to attune to the item that require you to be a sorcerer, the moment he gets confident of who he is, he attune to it

[Gabriel]

Except, you know,this is false, all of the sentient magic items in the dmg say they are sentinent in their description, unlike this helmet

As examples of sentient magic itens we have:
Whelm: "Sentience. Whelm is a sentient lawful neutral weapon with an Intelligence of 15, a Wisdom of 12, and a Charisma of 15." pg 218
Wave: Sentience. Wave is a sentient weapon of neutral alignment, with an Intelligence of 14, a Wisdom of 10, and a Charisma of 18. pg 218
Blackrazor: Sentience. Blackrazor is a sentient chaotic neutral weapon with an Intelligence of 17, a Wisdom of 10, and a Charisma of 19. pg 218


Baiscally, you want to use the canon item description for the tablet, because it fits your argument, but you are straight up ignoring the description of the helmet, because it refutes your argument, got it.

So what are your thoughts on Ed's class being "Bard" in those stat blocks?

And the whole bit is, that there was no "spirit" no sentience, when the old guy turns into him, it was just him fighting with himself, because he had no confidence

Its the whole development arc of the sorcerer he doesn't believe in himself as a true sorcerer, he have doubts and fears, hence, he was not able to attune to the item that require you to be a sorcerer, the moment he gets confident of who he is, he attune to it

So answer my previous question. Was he hallucinating the encounter with the spirit that turned into him, and was he doing acrobatics for fun the first time he tried to attune to the helmet, or did the helmet possess a sentience that reject him for not having the necessary self confidence?

None of this matters for his character arc btw. Whether it was latent schizophrenia or the sentience of the helmet that prevented him from attuning to it, he managed to do so only after Ed gave him the speech about how he always pulls through when it really counts.

[VMSmith]

Im just highlighting their argument

You're highlighting that you don't understand the basics of D&D one bit and can only regurgitate rules (wrongly, I might add).

Of course Holga the Wizard with 20 strength that never casts spells and only bonks people with their staff is just fine. That's D&D, dammit. There are no limits, there are really even no rules, only guidelines. There is no "wrong" way to play or portray D&D.

[Endus]

You're highlighting that you don't understand the basics of D&D one bit and can only regurgitate rules (wrongly, I might add).

Of course Holga the Wizard with 20 strength that never casts spells and only bonks people with their staff is just fine. That's D&D, dammit. There are no limits, there are really even no rules, only guidelines. There is no "wrong" way to play or portray D&D.

We're also trying to argue that these guys are somehow player characters. They aren't. There is no "player", here. They're NPCs. And NPCs A> follow different rules and C> can do things PCs cannot. It really is "whatever the creator wants" at that point, whether it's the DM or the movie writers.

Same for magic items; the stuff in the DMG isn't the sum total of everything that exists; special unique stuff is added in adventure books all the time. It's just the most common/iconic stuff, and DMs are encouraged to make up new stuff. I rarely if ever give out a "+1 longsword" or the like; all my magic items are like "Flickburn, a magical longsword which can attack in regular melee range with +1d6 fire damage, or with Reach dealing just the 1d6 fire damage and no weapon damage". Easily 80% of what I hand out to players as treasure is bespoke.

[VMSmith]

We're also trying to argue that these guys are somehow player characters. They aren't. There is no "player", here. They're NPCs. And NPCs A> follow different rules and C> can do things PCs cannot. It really is "whatever the creator wants" at that point, whether it's the DM or the movie writers.

That's a good point.

Also, there's the fact that movies and TV shows take liberties with source material to make it work better on film. This whole argument would be akin to someone claiming that Robert Downey Jr.'s portrayal of Iron Man was completely erroneous because none of the films dealt with Tony's crippling alcoholism, so it wasn't really Iron Man at all.