I'm unclear on what the area of effect of Spirit Guardians is on a grid.  The spell has a range of Self (15-foot radius).  Additionally, the description of the spell says that      You call forth spirits to protect you. They flit around you to a   distance of 15 feet for the Duration.   The problem here is that on a grid, an "area of effect with a 15-foot radius" is not the same as a "all targets within a distance of 15 feet".   An area of effect with a 15-foot radius would fall under the general rules for areas of effect on a grid (DMG p.251), for example as discuss .  The later could be interpreted as a range of 15 feet, or 3 squares away on a 5 feet grid.  On a 5' grid, what does the area look like?  Does it take one of the following shapes?          EDIT: this is not a duplicate of the Scroll of Protection question; the Scroll clearly has a cylinder area of effect, while the Spirit Guardians affects targets 15 feet away from the caster.
Per the 's Wild Magic Surge table (PHB, p. 104)     07-08: You cast fireball as a 3rd-level spell centered on yourself.   There's other questionable area spells in that list (grease is a 10 foot square, so your square and which three?), but I'll focus on spheres like  (PHB p. 241):     (...) Each creature in a 20-foot-radius sphere centered on the point must (...)   My problem is, the sources I found so far - including the   to similar questions here - talk about measuring spheres from grid square intersections, whereas this clearly talks about it being centered on the unlucky Wild Magic sorcerer. Plus, since it's a wild magic effect, it doesn't exactly have a caster that can pick a point of origin. Is there an accepted way to measure an effect like this?
Natbib puts reference data one line per item I'm using:  \documentclass[oneside,article,openbib,12pt,titlepage]{memoir} \usepackage[authoryear,round]{natbib} % Better bibliography support \bibpunct{(}{)}{,}{a}{,}{,}   in the preamble of my document and  \backmatter \renewcommand{\bibname}{References} \bibliographystyle{chicago}    \bibliography{listb,mybib}   in the body of the file. But a typical formatted reference is:     Freely, I. (1997).   A small paper.   The journal of small papers -1. to appear.   I've tried other non-natbib styles (e.g., regstud), and the reference flows and wraps as it should. So how does one get natbib to do the same?  Also, how does one get natbib to include the authors' entire first names? What is time, does it flow, and if so what defines its direction? Wrong view count for questions? I have a question with 1508 views, but in the personal page list it gets reported as 2k.  Bug or aggressive approximation? Get dateformat based on Locale Unable to locate package lib32bz2-1.0 I am trying to install Simplicity studio on Ubuntu 15.04 (64-bit) and I get this error  E: Unable to locate package lib32bz2-1.0 E: Couldn't find any package by regex 'lib32bz2-1.0'   I tried to install lib32bz2-1.0 package, again I get the same error. How to install package lib32bz2-1.0 on Ubuntu 15.04(64-bit) What are the system requirements for each flavour of Ubuntu Desktop? I'm thinking about installing Ubuntu Desktop, but I don't know what flavor is the best for my system. What are the minimum and recommended hardware requirements? What kind of CPU? How much memory? Should I have Hardware Acceleration? What flavor should I use?  This is an attempt of a canonical answer. My answers have the &quot;official  requirements&quot;, the recommended are a mix of official sources and opinion based (along with the answer it's told the source). You can comment or edit if you feel that the information is obsolete or incomplete. It is a good rule of thumb that any system capable of running Windows Vista, 7, 8, x86 (Intel) OS X will almost always be a lot faster with any Ubuntu flavor even if they are lower-spec than described below. I tried to open Software Center using the command line   software-center   and it did work. I mean, Software Center opened and works fine, BUT, at the same time, in the Terminal window I see a lot of strange errors. How can that be? I'm puzzled.   Is there any explanation for this (and a fix for it)? I repeat, the app does open and it works fine, is only the lines in the background that show that something is not all right.  Here are the screen-shots with all the lines. $a_1x_1+a_2x_2+a_3x_3+...+a_nx_n=$ is called a linear equation because it represents the equation of a line in an n dimensional space. So "linear" comes from the word "line".Basically there should not be any higher power of x failing which the graph of the function will not be a straight line.  simillarly  $a(x)y+b(x)y'+c(x)y"+d(x)y'''+...+q(x)=0$ is also called linear differential equation because all the derivatives have power equal to 1 which is similar to the above definition of a linear equation.  A function f is called linear if: $f(x+y)=f(x)+f(y)$ and $f(cx)=cf(x)$. Here c is a constant. In this definition of linearity of function "$f$" what does the word linear means? How does it relate to a straight line?  Finally what does the term linear means in case of linear vector spaces? Where is the reference to a straight line?  So, whether linear is just a word used in different contexts? Does it have different meaning in different situation? Or linearity refers to some relation to a straight line? At Least please explain how the linearity of function f and linear vector space relate to the equation of a line. How to add a gif file to my LaTeX file? Related:          I have an image file -- a gif file, which is the graph of a function. How do I add it to a LaTeX file? Will it come out OK in the subsequent pdf file? The question,  was closed at 04:50  And yet I was able to  at the time of 08:41 some four hours later.  The question was later reopened at 08:57 How to model an entity type that can have different sets of attributes? I am about to sell my old desktop PC and I am cautious about some of my sensitive information being available to the purchaser, even after reformatting the hard-drive, using data recovery software.  How can I securely wipe the hard drive so that the data on it cannot be recovered?  Although I specifically want help with my Windows PC, it wouldn't hurt if there were suggestions for Macs as well. Set "this" variable easily? I have a pretty good understanding of Javascript, except that I can't figure out a nice way to set the "this" variable.  Consider:  var myFunction = function(){     alert(this.foo_variable); }  var someObj = document.body; //using body as example object someObj.foo_variable = "hi"; //set foo_variable so it alerts  var old_fn = someObj.fn;   //store old value someObj.fn = myFunction;   //bind to someObj so "this" keyword works someObj.fn();               someObj.fn = old_fn;       //restore old value   Is there a way to do this without the last 4 lines?  It's rather annoying...  I've tried   binding an anonymous function, which I thought was beautiful and clever, but to no avail:  var myFunction = function(){     alert(this.foo_variable); }  var someObj = document.body;        //using body as example object someObj.foo_variable = "hi";        //set foo_variable so it alerts someObj.(function(){ fn(); })();    //fail.   Obviously, passing the variable into myFunction is an option... but that's not the point of this question.  Thanks. How can I make sharp geometric 3d models look more realistic? I'm making a scene in Blender with manufactured mechanical and electrical objects - cylinders, metal objects and so forth. I want to make these look real, be fully present with a sense of mass and substance.  3DCG has a tendency to make everything very sharply geometric, often looking mathematical and artificial. In other scenes, some organic curves, normal maps or particle systems would help make object look real. Like for example, making a simple plastic dog model look more believable, one can add more vertices for better definition, add texture layer, add fur etc.  My scene shows clean resistors, wires, metal strips and such, all sharply geometric. It's tricky to find ways to make the result less mathematical and more substantial, realistic and interesting to the eye.  What are some effective ways to add realism to these objects? How to create subfloat figures (two in first row and one below)? I want to place three figures like this on the page:  (a) (b)   (c)   How do I achieve this using subfloat or any other method in LaTeX? The three figures need to have a common caption and label.  I have tried this:  \begin{figure}[h] \centering \begin{tabular}{c c} \subfloat[] { \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{1.pdf} } &amp; \subfloat[] { \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{2.pdf} } \\ \multicolumn{2}{c} \subfloat[] { \includegraphics[scale=0.6]{3.pdf} } \end{tabular} \caption{Some caption} \label{some-label} \end{figure}   But, this is displaying [] for the third figure instead of (c). Also it displays [] to one side of the page instead of center. I have been trying to get a sense of the different problems in frequentist settings where MCMC is used. I am familiar that MCMC (or Monte Carlo) is used in fitting GLMMs and in maybe Monte Carlo EM algorithms. Are there more frequentist problems where MCMC is used? Is there an easy way to calculate the residue at one of the poles of a rational expression of the form $\frac{1}{1+z^n}$?  I end up having to add a bunch of polar-form complex numbers in the denominator which I have no idea how to do except to convert them to rectangular coordinates, which becomes really messy.  I feel like there ought to be simple pattern/rule for such a canonical expression. Google Play: Error downloading app - insufficient space Im trying to have the bibliography defined for my document using BibTeX and the natbib citation management package. Styles such as unsrtnat give me the references in order of appearance in text. However, I have a problem that I cannot get around. Basically if a reference is supposed to look like:     Tyson J.P. Dikstra M. Holmes F.M.R. Theoretical Analysis on Effect of   Anomalous Low Friction. International journal of Placticity,   34(3-4):413, 1997.   after typesetting it appears as :     Dikstra M. Holmes F.M.R. Tyson J.P. Theoretical Analysis on Effect of   Anomalous Low Friction. International journal of Placticity,   34(3-4):413, 1997.   In other words, it puts the first author in the last place. Is there any method of getting around this?  The entry as it appears in the .bib file (refs.bib) is:  @ARTICLE{Tyson1997, author={Tyson, J.P., Dikstra, M., Holmes, F.M.R.}, title={Theoretical Analysis on Effect of Anomalous Low Friction.}, journal={International journal of Plasticity}, year={1997}, volume={34}, number={3-4}, pages={413}, document_type={Article} }   An excerpt from the tex file:  \usepackage[round,comma]{natbib} \begin{document}  As an alternative method of analysis, \citet{Tyson1997} ...  \bibliographystyle{unsrtnat}  \bibliography{refs}  \end{document} How to show $\lim_{n \to \infty} \sqrt[n]{a^n+b^n}=\max \{a,b\}$? Let $a\geq 0$ and $ b\geq 0$. Prove that $\lim_{n \to \infty} \sqrt[n]{a^n+b^n}=\max \{a,b\}$. [Hint: Use the identity $(a^n -b^n)=(a-b)(\sum_{i=0}^{n-1}a^ib^{n-1-i})$]    I need some help! I cannot do it even with the hint... :(