>Core rulebooks, adventure modules, Unearthed Arcana
>Pastebin with homebrew list, resources and so on:
What part of it sucks for your players?
If you miss artificer, then there's not much to do besides wait for wotc to give us some sort of magic expansion; this whole edition is very low magic
quit forcing your shitty thread
Because the crafting rules are meant for adventurers who don't dedicate their entire lives to crafting, unlike craftsmen NPCs--Crawford actually said this, having trouble finding the tweet about it though. It's not supposed to be something players focus on.
So /5eg/, what are some ways to get your low level, poor players access to a boat early on?
I've thought of some of the obvious ones like a gift from a noble they did a big favor, piracy, and something like an explorer's guild, but is there something obvious I'm missing?
Put them on quests to obtain impossible magical components, like 'The Sound of Wind', 'a Wooden Stick that does not Bend' or 'the Tears of a Gleeful Tree'.
Once you have the components, crafting the items should be a triviality - You (most likely) used a good deal of time getting these items, after all.
Gonna DM for the first time in a few weeks. Any tips on how to make a cool aventure?
Whatever you do, remember the rules are there to work out anything you can't just decide on.
DM should be first port of call when deciding results. There's nothing worse than a DM with their nose in the rule books, looking up minute and not telling a tale.
In terms of story, keep it simple and mildly personal - don't make one PC, or worse, an NPC the main character.
Have their local tavern burnt down and their stuff stolen, that sort of stuff.
Saving the world should come later, their drive should be more down to earth to start with.
>Because OP didn't pose a question.
No, not just this one, but the last couple have been made by complete idiots, and people still felt like posting in them.
We even had one fag make a frogpost OP, and you guys kept posting in it.
Like, the players press gang people into their crew, or the players are press ganged into a crew?
Either one is actually pretty damn interesting, and they can always start a mutiny if they dislike being lackeys
Depends on the situation.
Champion fighter puts out the highest on a single target, Evocation wizard technically has higher DPR on packed together groups (assuming they can keep spells up)
That's not easy to answer because it usually depends on finite resources. Note that it's going to be pretty close regardless.
But it is probably going to be a GWM user.
If you're level 11+, Fighter. Three attacks plus Action Surge in that one round.
But before that? Barbarian's get a consistent damage boost on ever hit while raging, which is probably all the time. Paladins get more damage from Smite, but they have limited slots.>>44714480
I'm pretty sure Champion fighter does more. Maybe if the rogue is also hasted and/or has some other method to guarantee that he also gets his reaction SA.
Pic slightly related.
Today I'm starting in a table as a Human Fighter, greatsword, Fighting style Great Weapon, and Feat Great Weapon Master, I think that the DPS is pretty insane for a level 1 character, this character will be a champion.
>Might as well ask why niggers are niggers, or goblins goblins.
> Because Nigger Live there. Go kill them, brave Adventurer!
> So that you have proof that you killed them. Failing that, if you parleyed with them, their missing cocks would prevent this shit from happpening again. Also, no more niggoblin babbys.
> A wizard did it.
> Abortion is wrong! They'll kill the baby after it is born (OR) Are you suggesting killing the heir apparent?
> Goblin cocks prevetn goblin babbys in case you agreed not to kill them.
> A goblin fuccked the princess.
I've been DMing for a few years now, and having one character as the "leader" is usually the best way to get the group to move forward in my opinion. In groups without a clear leader, players could waste up to half an hour on simply deciding whether or not they should leave town to the north or to the south. You shouldn't appoint a character as the main character, but if you notice one of your players is a bit more forward and takes charge easily, let him get into that role. The group will still decide things together, but the "leader" will eventually go "Okay, let's go north", he'll make a decision if the group won't reach one on their own. Give each character a plot hook and sprinkle them a bit of their plot throughout the campaign, and they won't even notice they have a leader.
If they do complain, make sure to sort it out quickly though. If they realise they have a leader, and they feel it impairs their agency, they'll be royally pissed off. It's your job to keep the game running smoothly enough that they don't notice.
You are playing favorites in a group of equals. Everyone is there to have fun and I'm sorry if you and your players are too incompetent to decide on what to do but a "main character" is far too cringey.
>his motivations are what set the story into motion
Well no, the Tam siblings are what set the story into motion. Without them Mal would have done his small crimes business as usual and then run out of money halfway through the series.
River arguably saves the day on Niska's station. Before that, they didn't have much influence beyond causing side plots and the whole first episode (which led nowhere). Simon does surgery a bunch of times and sets up the hospital heist, but Zoe could probably have kept everyone alive with her field medic skills, and Simon's heist was purely a sidequest for everyone but Simon himself, River and Jayne.
I had noticed that and fixed it. I also moved some things around to make challenge more useful at lower levels, and fixed the potential Action Surge abuse with the cap. The cap here can seem a bit extreme, but keep in mind that it's basically 1 HP per hit die at the level you get it.
holy god do i love magic, from 3.5 to 5e, i love using magic. if i was a real wizard my life would be complete, id be using magic and studying it in BLackstaff tower and i dont care about adventures, just delving into tghe theories of magic, and the ancient elven mythalls, and the nether scrolls, and the mysteries of lichdome, and the gods of magic, and the endless studies, why would anyone use a sword when they could study the greatest mystery in the multiverse? if my chesyt had been a canon, it would have fired my heart upon the spelllists...
What's the best way to "get into" D&D?
Read everything possible in the books and hope I can observe a few games with locals before I attempt a game?
I don't want to be the one asking every three seconds what something is or does.
Read the Player's Handbook and find a group that'll let you join, learning as you go.
Alternatively, start your own group with like-minded friends.
Either way, asking questions is better than making stupid assumptions.
>I don't want to be the one asking every three seconds what something is or does.
That is the best way to get into it though. Read the PHB of whatever edition you intend to play then play with people who actually know it. It might even be better if you ignore fluff and come in fresh; the setting might actually come off as interesting to you
See if you can't find a local or online group. Learning in a vacuum is hard, and no amount of book reading will make it easier.
Also, unless you're specifically looking to DM, avoid the DMG & MM. Both are good, but many of the DMG materials are optional and the MM is just monster stats. I've seen several newcomers read themselves into a hell of an analysis paralysis case before.
Reposting from previous thread:
I'm running PotA. Right now they have not fought the fire cult at all, and just finished a five combat brawl in the gardens of the earth cult monastery. I was nice with the Unber Hulk, who dropped players then fled to wreak more havoc in the surrounding hills. There are still enemies there, but for the parties purposes they consider it a rousing victory. They were doing this as a job for the air cult, as all but the cleric (the only surviving original member) have not fought them. The Air cult (through representatives from Feathergale Knights) is going to surprise them at their next long rest, offer fast travel to a town of the parties choosing, and take them there to receive payment. But first there will be a minor detour to force evil actions from the party, as the Air Cult has learned of the Aaracokra paired near their dungeon, and want to force the cleric to help them kill the bird people. This is important, as the party was saved at level two by these Aarocokra, and basically lied to them for help. The diminished tribe will attack after a few biting verbal attacks, along with their hidden Air Elemental ally. If the party aides the cult, they receive their promised reward (4,000 GP, scrolls of gaseous form, invisibility, and fly, six basic healing potions, oil of slipperiness, two potions of climbing, a potion of fire breathing, and a potion of water breathing) and the location of the water cult. If the party refuses and aides the Aarocokra (and survives, since I'm thinking of having five Aarocokra vs. ten Knights, a priest, seven hippogriffs, and a giant vulture) I am thinking of gifting the party an Air Elemental Gem, from the DMG. If the Aarocokra suffer minor losses due to help from the party, I was thinking of allowing future characters to be of that race. Thoughts?
We're in a bit of a bind right now. Currently a character is planned to be the target of Speak With The Dead. However, he took a flintlock round to the face at point blank as the killing blow, taking out the space between his upper row of teeth and his nostrils, including those two areas.
Would he be able to give proper answers if brought back?
For a Rogue Assassin who is dual weilding vs a single surprised target, does Assassinate (advantage to hit, any hit is crit), Death Strike (CON save against double damage), and the Sneak Attack bonus (9-10d6) all stack up?
The way I read it, it would be one attack;
>9-10d6, rolled twice for crit, then doubled
>weapon damage, rolled twice for crit, then doubled
>weapon damage, rolled twice for crit, then doubled
At lvl17, one hitting for 180+ potential damage just doesnt sound right
Sneak attack is one dice per round.
Rogues don't get a fighting style, so your of-hand attacks will be weaker unless you take a fighter or ranger dip.
The assassin stuff is raw, though.
I still don't understand the difference between Perception and Investigation.
The rule of thumb in my head is: "Perception is noticing things, Investigation is discovering things", yet Investigation very rarely comes up in any games I've played.
I thought Perception mapped to Spot and Listen from d20, and Investigation to Search, yet even official adventures seem to base searching a room on Perception a lot of the time. Perception DC 15 and the player notices the hidden gem, Investigation be damned.
Investigation has been used in our group pretty religiously for looting, you roll to see if the corpse has anything hidden on him, or if you notice that certain trinkets are valuable.
I really, really, really want a DMG II right now that explains them in more detail. Now that it's all optional/variant rules, re-add in some of the crunch from 3.5.
Give me a GUMSHOE-style clues system for Investigation checks.
List more actions that can be performed with a successful Acrobatics check.
Throw in "varying degrees of success" options for knowledge checks, which every DM does anyway.
Re-add skill challenges for people who know how to use them.
Im pretty good on the Sneak Attack bonus, was more asking about Assassinate/Death Strike stacking the crit/double bonuses.
If the Assassin has even a half-assed tank along with, they get one Sneak Attack bonus every round, just for having said tank parking it's ass next to the enemy.
Flying solo, if the PC has competant skill distrubution, it can Suprise/Kite/Stealth to pretty good effect.
Well now that I think about it, it requires the target to miss a Perception, the attacker beats their AC, and the target fails a CON save. Guess that balances out.
There are plenty of YouTube videos that teach you a few phonemes in under five minutes so you sound Scottish or German instead of English, American, whatever your native accent is. Or you can impersonate celebrities, people will get the character straight away if you're doing your Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Have a nice podcast:
wtf, no. perception is seeing, hearing, smelling, etc. things around you. a passive perception is typically used to spot sneaking people around, who are about to steal your fucking weed. investigation is sorting through, searching out, being inquisitive, working out a puzzle, etc. passive investigation is used for working out shit on the fly. like how sherlock holmes sees a scratch on a dudes leg and deduces all kinds of shit. perception is seeing shit with your eyes, investigation is sorting shit out with your brain. legolas would gave a high passive perc, and sherlock holmes would have a high passive investigate
you fags are dumb
you know that moment in a movie whwere the dude is like "wait, what is that?" and everyone looks around, and they're like "what?" then a rhino crashes through the woods and fucks everyone up? that nigga has a high passive perception. you know when sherlock looks at a wad of bubblegum and deduces thatsome nigga killed another nigga in the alps 40 years ago using a candlestick? thats passive investigation. one is touching and one is seeing? you niggas are stupid, fuck
>Im pretty good on the Sneak Attack bonus, was more asking about Assassinate/Death Strike stacking the crit/double bonuses.
No, you aren't. You only get to sneak attack once on your turn, period. You don't get to sneak attack again while TWF.
I don't know whats worse, that you are this retarded, or that you can't fix yourself when people show you how.
The 'rolled twice' after sneak attack is because it is a crit and yes, sneak attack damage does get doubled rolled on a crit, it specifically uses it as an example in the crit rules. He isn't making the offhand attack sneak attack at all.
I'm looking for CLUES.
Some subtle detail in the way he types, something he mentioned, perhaps a hidden secret buried somewhere in the thread.
Screw you. >>44718489 is helping me so I'm taking the higher roll.
Being somewhat sure, I am definitely sure. Thanks DM!
This is a thing I notice a lot too.
"Roll a Nature check."
"You're not sure, but you think these might be the rare silverleaf trees."
"Well you can't say for certain, but it looks like he's lying."
"Give me a Perception roll."
"You don't SEE anything, but you do hear a group of what sounds like goblins in the next room."
How to not do this, /5eg/?
Are you eventually planning on making the PCs fight the air cult?
Also, go easy on the magic items. We had a DM who gave them out with a 3.5 mindset and it blew up the campaign. Literally. Everybody quit soon after.
Early BBC Sherlock is close to making this work, if only they showed the audience this stuff before Sherlock's deduction. It's not satisfying. It's like a whodunnit where the murderer is the butler you never saw.
"You don't recognize these trees."
"You can't tell if he's lying or telling the truth."
"You don't see or hear anything suspicious."
Know what happens next? Whiny players.
BUT I ROLLED PERCEPTION
Sun Soul gives you some very solid range abilities that are always on, getting your squishy ass away from close combat and also helping with multiple enemies.
Shadow is extremely solid if you wanted to invest heavily into your secondary stealth and scouting aspects.
Long Death provides self-sustaining abilities for what is a fairly fragile melee class, as well as great combat utility and in general it's very strong.
The only one to avoid is 4 elements, although I don't find Open Hand particularly useful compared to having a Shadow, Long Death or Sunday Soul in the party. I would rather see a Bear Totem Barbarian or Battle Master, Eldritch Knight Fighter, or a Swashbuckler Rogue with a solid build like dipping Warlock (Light pateon, Blade Pact) for Green-Flame Blade and more utility.
"So what do we do now?"
"Can I try again?"
"John, you try."
Sad thing is, sometimes they're right. They missed the clue, they're utterly lost in the forest now. Which sounds exciting, but it could also be completely boring. Yet if you just let them follow the breadcrumbs automatically, it risks ruining the player's choices and the whole success/failure paradigm.
I've completely turned on skill challenges. Not (just) to be a contrarian dick, they're a neat mechanic for a certain flavour of play.
Read the 4E DMG II and some of its examples. They got rid of the different amounts of failures (now it's always three) and some of the challenges are pretty interesting. I still hate that the DCs scale to the PC levels in 4E, but hey, that's easily fixed.
The river example is nice because depending HOW the group completes the challenge, it creates different outcomes. And it gives everyone a chance to shine in a natural, organic way. The ranger uses Nature to navigate the twists and turns of the river. The wizard uses History to recall a map of the area, which helps the others with their checks. Then oh shit, rapids. The fighter falls off but uses Athletics to get back on the raft. The rogue uses Acrobatics to stay on the raft in the first place.
Everyone gets a chance to shine. This particular example has ghosts where either intelligence or social skills might matter. You could have a party of nothing but wizards or a party of nothing but fighters and it would go differently, since they rely on different skills.
Ultimately, the fact that a ranger helped describe the area early on might save your life, or they failed to do so and now you're off-course and fatigued.
The bandits example is another good one because there are two "paths", you either succeed (or fail) at catching the bandits speedily, or you succeed (or fail) at catching the bandits stealthily. There are different outcomes depending on how the characters approach the problem, rather than one tracker character rolling a Survival check and then either succeeding or failing and that's that.
I'm letting the Player's choose who to fight, but I have been controlling most of their travel with violent attacks from cults through random encounters. The party is level five, and they only have a few potions as magic items. This horde is for carrying out combat against the Earth Cult. The war cleric that is dominating the combats cannot really use the scrolls. They party would not get the Air Elemental Gem without betraying the Air Cult (whose mounts, that the players are NOT controlling, they are riding a few hundred feet in the air), which will be difficult since only three characters are alive, and as stated above the players and Aarocokra are vastly outnumbered. If they kill all the cultists, the treasure from them will fall and be scattered on the valley below. If they drive them off, they will lose the treasure.
I just remembered, the Barbarian has Bracer's of Archery. But other than that (and the Broom of Flying that the fourth player's new character requested), I've been very careful about giving magic items. Some might say miserly.
>"Roll a Nature check."
>"You're not sure, but you think these might be the rare silverleaf trees."
>"Well you can't say for certain, but it looks like he's lying."
>"Give me a Perception roll."
>"You don't SEE anything, but you do hear a group of what sounds like goblins in the next room."
>How to not do this, /5eg/?
You're unable to identify these trees, but in the attempt, you deduce they're not any variety of tree you're familiar with. Perhaps you can find a, uh... arbor...olog...ist? and ask them, maybe show them some leaves or something. Or conduct a [long, prone to interruptions by flying gribblies] ritual to positively ID the tree.
You can't ascertain whether he's lying or telling the truth, but you get the feeling he has ulterior motives.
You notice nothing of note, except that the hallway between this room and the next seems heavily worn down- a high traffic passageway.
These aren't great examples, but the point is don't think in terms of pass/fail, but in terms of degrees of failure. A failed roll can still be a success, but it will be a more circuitous and/or dangerous one.
Hmm, I think I preferred dicking with my players by never having anything short of succeed on any check.
You spot a shiny golden ring in the gutter, some poor soul must have lost it today.
What you didn't spot was the knife wielding murder orc hiding in the alley to your left, but you'll see him soon enough.
The way that maneuvers are worded in the PHB confuses me. Do you declare that you're going to use a superiority die on a maneuver before you see if the attack rolls? And, if you do, do you consume that superiority die if the attack misses? Or do you only declare that you're doing a maneuver after you see that the attack lands?
I don't remember seeing any errata about this, so I'm probably just reading it poorly.
so I'm running this game and there's some really valuable items in a chest but only if you open it from the back.
How would you handle this? Just wait until they say "I try to open it from the back?" I feel like some clue should be given, but I can't think of any other way than just obviously saying there's something funny about the back of the chest. Which is way too easy.
Depends on each maneuver. Just read each one more closely. They all say when to roll. Ones that effect the attack roll tend to say you can roll and see the number and then decide if you add superiority before you find out if made it past their AC or not.
I don't really like this at all.
It's not very powerful; the fluff/name encourages a personality trope that's already over-abundant among fighter characters; and it's most effective application is as a tanking mechanism, not a dueling one.
If it was my homebrew, I'd change it to be based around gaining a bonus from winning, rather than tanking. Both parties would have disadvantage against other targets, not just your enemy. The duel would end if either of you is damaged by a third party (but I might give you both disadvantage to being attacked, or something).
If you win, you gain a combat buff until your next long rest. If you lose, the opposite.
As you increase in level, I'd improve the bonus, add in some of the tankiness during the challenge you already have, a "power attack" that allows you to properly fuck a motherfucker up if you don't move that turn, an anime as fuck X per Y rest ability to substitute your CHA save value for any other saving through, and finally grant the lategame ability to challenge an entire group of enemies at once. Come at me bro.
But that's just, like, my opinion, man.
So, Menacing Strike says "when you hit a creature with a weapon attack". I assume that you wait until after you've seen that the attack does hit the target before you use the die? Meanwhile, Lunging Attack is when you make an attack, but before you confirm if it hits, because it says "when you make a melee weapon attack"?
1. Describe the chest in a way that's slightly more descriptive than the normal chest, but don't give any indication of the back of the chest or whatever.
2. Wait for them to inevitably scour the chest, because you used more words than normal to describe it and WHAT DOES IT ALL MEAN DAMNIT
Terrible idea inc, tell me if I'm being extremely retarded with this character concept.
5 druid / 5 ranger / 10 sorcerer
starting off as 1/1/1 because I don't like the concept of "picking up" any of these classes.
The druid will be circle of the land with Mountains.
The ranger will have favored enemy dragons and favored terrain mountains. Archery will be the fighting style and Hunter the archtype, with colossus slayer.
The sorcerer will have a silver dragon bloodline.
For the most part, the only difference I've noticed in how they work is that it was the other one we needed when someone looks for traps when we play with a certain DM.
Investigation tends to be up to DM interpretation a lot, so if your DM doesn't put a lot of stock into it focus on perception, if they do have both.
So I'm playing a School of Lore, story telling bard. I want my character to always have a readily available story to tell that varies. To do this I was going to make a d20 chart with excel that I can roll whenever I need to tell a story. I was thinking of having like 3 or 4 colums that I can roll (person/place/event etc). Any ideas? Tips? Resources?
I have a strange idea for a character as well, but not as strange as the dragon sorcerer druidic ranger.
Mountain Dwarf rogue
16 str, 14 dex, 12 con, 10 int, 10 wis, 14 cha
Swashbuckler archetype, Pirate background, probably LE or LN alignment.
boons of these classes
con + cha saves
4 cantrips /4/3/3/3/2
2 metamagic feats 10 sorcerer points creating spell slots with sorcerer points ends at 5th level spells. Silver dragons use cold damage and live in mountains, cone of cold is a 5th level spell, draconic resiliance gives +1 hp per level in sorc, hill dwarf is another +1 which turns sorce effectively into a d6 + 2 + con hit die class.
ranger will give dex + str saves
and a fighting style along with favored enemy/terrain, colosssus slayer is 1d8 extra damage once each turn if the target is below max hp.
4/2 for spell slots
druid gives int / wis as saves (all 6 saves covered)
3 cantrips / 4/3/2
wild shape as well as spider climb/spike growth/lightning bolt/meld to stone as well as natural recovery to regen up to a 3rd level spell every shot rest (the max level for level 5 rounded up)
This seems to be the most efficient spread between these classes and the main stats I need are Wis/Cha/Dex/Con 2 of which are given by hill dwarf. Along with the wide spread of skills this character will be able to fill a wide arangement of spells and cast all day every day while even having strong ranged combat to fall back on.
I'll be giving up the high level shenanagins spells for sorcerer but the "big damage" spells basically end at 5.
You are going to need to re-read how multiclassing works. You don't get every feature, full stop, from every class you take.
You choose 1 as your level 1 class. You get everything for that. Everything else gives you only a selection.
You can't get saving throw proficiency by multiclassing.
You don't get the new saving throw proficiencies from multiclassing. I think whichever one you get at lvl 1 is the only ones you get. I'm not positive on this since I have never multiclassed personally but I am going to check it out now.
Also, by being 10 sorc and 5 druid your effective multiclass casting level is 15, giving you access to cast spells at lvl 8, but since you multiclass you can only prepare lvl 3 or lower druid spells and only know lvl 5 and lower sorcer spells. This I discussed with some players at my table today.
UA is full of not shit options. Some of them may be a little too OP for your liking (in my opinion 5e by default is a little underpowered for my liking), but a good handful of them aren't what I'd consider shit.
Oh yeah I definitely read it wrong, thats a really shitty combo then. My idea for 12 fighter/8 monk would work though.
extra attack (2) from fighter using a quarterstaff, go down battlemaster, and take the great fighting style.
With monk go down open palm. Then you would have attack action + furious blows bonus action + trip attack.
with 20 dex that would be
2d8 + 10 damage + 2d6 + 10 damage + 1d10 damage + 2 trip attempts, 1 from trip attack and 1 from the extra unarmed attacks + Open hand technique
This would also give you wholeness of body, slowfall, deflect missiles, and evasion. Idk if this is better than going down full monk or fighter though.
The Honor score works because if you're playing a nobles campaign, and there's any nontrivial amount of political dickery going on (and why play nobles if you don't want politics?), then your Honor checks are probably going to matter a hell of a lot more than your hit rolls quite often
The Sanity score works because, well, who hasn't played Dungeons & Cthulhus once in a while?
>Delve too deep
>Have a close encounter with Things Man Should Not Know
>"AAAAAGH! FUCK! KILL IT! KILL IT WITH FIRE!!!"
>Time to make a Sanity check, Bob.
Yeah, I understand what you'd be rolling against, but I feel like they'd be more... I don't know, fluid. Like failing an Honor roll had the potential to reduce your score permanently. Same for SAN.
Maybe I just gotta take a break from GMing Deathwatch for a bit.
Did I do something wrong the second time other than forget that extra attack 2 is actually 3 attacks? I don't think the idea is as good as just going great weapon fighter, taking a greataxe, and then going down champion though.
I'm having trouble trying to do anything really interesting with the character creation because theres so little wiggle room.
What do you define as "interesting?" Because "lol I can do some damage" is not interesting. Maybe you should step back and focus on character personality and backstory than trying (poorly) to make something mechanically "interesting."
Isn't that what investigation checks are for?
>There's a chest, it seems slightly unusual
>Okay I check out the chest
>under DC: You can't quite put your finger on what's funny about it
>meet or exceed DC: There's something funny about the way it's hinged in the back
Either result should lead them to trial and error experimentation with the chest...or them setting it on fire because they think it's a mimic.
Is it wrong that I want to play a sword and shield fighter for my next character?
that stuff is system agnostic though, you can do that with any system but it doesn't let you mechanically play a different type of character. I don't really value maxing damage, I value maxing versitility and cool shit I can do at the table. Neither of the combos I chose ephasized maximum damage. the monk fighter was maximising hitting like 7 times in a single turn max or some shit to watatatatatata someone with a quarterstaff.
desu, sword and board is my favorite fighting style. I love having a very solid defense and with the new changes made in 5e, sword and board is on par damage wise with alot of other options. (GWF still does more but thats to be expected.)
nah 3, i'd start 1 fighter 2 monk. I'm starting to think I should just play a champion fighter though and focus on the non mechanics. Its not worth it really to try and find a cool niche. I'll just start working on the character I guess. Maybe I'll use something cool like a flail + shield though. Or maybe I'll go full derp and just longsword + shield + human and try to break trope by being the best roleplayer at the table instead of FIGHTER .
But they are fluid. The rules for Honor say the DM should raise or lower the stat based on the character's actions in game, and the rule for Sanity has it go down every time you go mad. (Of course, Sanity damage can be fixed by magic, but hey, so can death, you can't have everything.)
Well, you could thing of Honor as "Charisma versus upper class twits". So you could be influential because of charm and wit (Charisma), or you could be influential because you're a member of the Order of the Purple Griffin, and heir to the Duchy of Outer Nowhere (Honor). Just another case of money being attracted to money.
I'll have to re-read that; my DMG is on the other end of the room and I'm about to go to bed.
My group's setting is sort of pacific rim/polynesia/east asia, so there's capacity for the HON mechanic if we want it. Also talking with the other DMs about an NPC type that casts off Honor, drawing their power from the people's love/respect/deference for them.
Spirit. Bomb. Paladin.
That would work pretty well for the ruling class. I could see the Emperor ending up with the ludicrous spiritual powers they were supposed to have (casting off a 30 stat score, OUCH!).
In retrospect I didn't need to call you a shitface, I'm sorry guy. I'll stick to one class though since multiclassing seems pretty terrible unless your doing wizard with armor meme builds.
It's certainly weaker, but you're still a full caster. All you really need is Wisdom for that, and if you don't even have good Wisdom you can still eke out an okay existence using buffs and such that don't call for saves and the like.
Still better at doing something than a weapon-using class that doesn't have a good attack stat.
Only in terms of it's animals forms compared to other martial classes (which have just gotten Extra Attack).
So instead of just transforming into a bear and ripping people's faces off you summon a pack of wolves, transform into a bear and rip people's faces off next turn.
So is the best way to play non-AT rogue now to go magic initiate and take green flame + booming blade/something else? Or are you better off attacking normally in case you miss your first attack and you can attack with your offhand?
A Swashbuckler can be pretty silly with Booming Blade.
Cunning Action Dash, run up and BB a dude, they can't attack you as you walk away so they have to move if they want to come after you thanks to fancy footwork.
Given how the Swashbuckler's sneak attack works, you can even consistently sneak attack a guy while you're at it as long as his buddies aren't nearby.
It's only about ~15 extra damage for sure off the top of my head. You could always go Sharpshooter, though that might require getting your hands on the Archery fighting style via a dip in Fighter.
But Undying Light was pretty decent, anon. Like I said, it may be a little OP for your liking, and the default fluff was pretty meh, but the concept and features are actually not that bad. Nor were the rest of the options presented in that UA. Shadow sorcerer, dark stalker ranger, the two that made it into the SCAG, along with a handful of other options really aren't that awful.
You're overblowing how bad a lot of the UAs are. Some of them are awful (hello Variant Rules edition), but there's been at least a handful of options that were nice or nice enough to build off of.
>Play female character for the first time just to try it out
>Playing a cleric of sune
>Barbarian keeps trying to rape me everytime we get to an inn so he can take me back to his tribe
>Fighter keeps making sexist remarks against me
>Warlock of Dendar constantly tries to mind break me into his personal servant
I'm never playing a female again
>first time DM running LMoP
>the group is constantly finding ways to run the encounters out of sequence
>by talking to Agatha the banshee they've already learned the vague direction of Wave Echo Cave rather than asking her the intended question
>by rushing through the Ruins of Thundertree and talking to the druid they know where Cragmaw Castle is (no exploring the rest of the ruins after they got what they were looking for obviously)
>they didn't give a shit about the Redbrandts harassing the town even after being directly attacked by them and being dropped hints that something shady is going on at the manor (their hideout, which remains ignored)
>they're massively underleveled for both the assault on the Castle AND the trek to the Cave
I'm thinking that maybe I'll pull some bullshit where people have conveniently gone missing around the same timeframe that the party left to go exploring, so nobody in town trusts them (or will provide services) until they clear their names. Hopefully they'll be coaxed to go to the Redbrandt Hideout and find those missing people (who are going to be sold as slaves), giving the party the opportunity to get into more battles and level up.
Although oh god maybe they won't.
Maybe they'll say "fuck this town anyway" and go off to challenge a whole castle as a small gang of level 2 characters and die violent deaths.
There is just no predicting anything with these people, and they have no idea that I have no idea what I'm doing and am just making stuff up as I go...
Yeah you're right I was being unclear. I just mean I'm trying to shoehorn the player's backstories into Phandalin. It's hard to make them care that a stranger they don't know named Gundren has been kidnapped without making it more personal to them.
Seem like the most obvious and easiest solution. Maybe it's not such a big deal afterall, thanks.
>DM has us hunting down a minotaur that keeps challenging anything sentient it comes across to a battle of strength
>If they lose they are beaten to death
>If they refuse him they are beaten to death
>We never found anyone who actually won
>When we find and eventually kill this bastard its body turns into a card
>A card from the deck of many things (strength to be exact)
>DM tells us that until the deck is assembled the cards work differently
>Once a week we can use the card to get a special effect
>Each card will choose a master when defeated and only that person can use it unless they relinquish it to another
>It took us getting three cards before we realized that we were playing Card Captor Sakura the DnD game
I cant even begin to describe how dumb I felt for not catching it immediately
That sounds... like a really cool concept, actually. Kudos to your DM for ripping off an anime and making it work.
Oh it is really fun though now we roll our eyes at a few things that we now catch as references.
Currently we are hunting a heavily robed man who never talks. Anyone who manages to catch a glimpse of his face under his pale white mask ends up dead within 24 hours.
It is pretty obvious as to which card this one is.
I would personally advise against rewriting the CR of any part of LMoP
except maybe tweak down that goddamned green dragon in the ruins. that thing is so unfair and can single handedly party wipe your group.
Instead, let them do as they will, and if they live, grand. If they die, its their fault for trying to rush in to dangerous situations without even trying to solve anything like a bunch of CN barbarians. I feel this is the best and fairest way of dealing with situations like this.
There are plenty of opportunities to find out about
Venomfangprior, so I'm ok with it. The real bastard of a thing is the Cult of the Dragon cultists can pretend to be friendly, accompany the players to Venomfang and then ally with Venomfang against the players
If you have spell slots, can you use them to cast the 1st-level spell you learn with the Magic Initiate feat? Yes, but only if the class you pick for the feat is one of your classes. For example, if you pick sorcerer and you are a sorcerer, the Spellcasting feature for that class tells you that you can use your spell slots to cast the sorcerer spells you know, so you can use your spell slots to cast the 1st-level sorcerer spell you learn from Magic Initiate. Similarly, if you are a wizard and pick that class for the feat, you learn a 1st-level wizard spell, which you could add to your spellbook and subsequently prepare.
I never knew that desu. Our group actually
defeated and chased off the green dragon, and the cultist ran from our group as soon as it realized what we had done. Btw, that bastard almost killed 3 of us and also would of one turned mass damage killed me, but the DM used fiat to let me make death saves instead.
So with that said, dont make it easy on them but maybe throw them a bone since they are so weak.
I'd pay money if Wizards simply converted old 2e modules for me. They don't need to license out the D&D name or create dozens of splat books to do such things. I genuinely miss the days where you could buy a little 30 page booklet, the cover unbound to server as a DM screen and convenient place to put the maps, and entertain a group for a few sessions.
I would shell out for modules structured like they were in the 80s and 90s. Hardbacked module books are just too unwieldy. They don't need to create splat books with new spells, classes, and rules to entertain all their players.
hmmm, ok then. Seems odd since multiclassing cleric and wizard would allow you to share the spell casting list for spells per day and whatnot, but all i have seen supports you so ok.
Quick question relating to monks, using their ability to use two unarmed attacks per turn, does their dex modifier get added to both attacks damage or just one?
So sat level one would their damage (With fists, I know quarterstaff is better) be
2d4 + 6 (Assuming 16 Dex) or just 2d4+3
Much obliged friend, that's what I thought but it's late and I've read through a few of the sections but couldn't find anything saying the opposite, but but I just figured I would fact check before bed.
How do you guys feel about making some of the players' skill check rolls for them in secret? For example, rolling secretly for insight so if you tell them they trust a character they're not inclined to metagame around it because they saw they rolled a 2.
in theory this would work out ok but in actuality there are a fair number of abilities you can use post skill check to improve your roll, like bardic inspiration and the lucky feat.These abilities were designed in a way that you need to see your own roll so you can know whether or not to use it.
Basically the same as rolling Stealth or Deception for enemies and comparing it to their passive scores. I don't know what specific circumstance you'd do your suggestion in since Insight is generally opposed by something, but there's basically little to no effective difference, save perhaps a little more randomness if you're rolling for both player and enemy.
Make sure you justify it well, though. Players generally like rolling for themselves, so your taking away their ability to make their own rolls might be seen as akin to removing player agency, even though it really isn't. Try not to say 'I don't trust you not to metagame'.
That said, I generally interpret a 2 on Insight as complete inability to gain any insight into the target's motivations or emotions, meaning they don't gain any information, rather than gaining false information. If you look at it that way, it'd also obviate this solution.
Depends on the situation. If it's to check if they spot something unusual, hear something, or realise someone is lying, I'll make the roll for them, or more accurately check on my pre-rolled list, to make sure they're unaware something just happened. If they then want to use abilities like >>44727482 suggests, they have to tell me they're doing that before the skill check.
>"Okay, the vizier ushers you aside and says: 'I know-"
>"I use my ability to tell if he's lying."
>"Fair enough. Anyway, he says: "
I have copies of their character sheets and usually prepare a bit so I can do it seamlessly. I'm not going to accept something like
>Bard: "I start playing music to boost his sense lies ability."
though, because that would just result in a
>"The vizier stares at you in annoyance and waits for you to stop playing music."
Why does people prefers great axes over greatswords on barbarians? Or is it merely taste?
I'm having a blast with my greatsword; Only missed a hit once, the rest of the hits during all the campaign were either almost deadly, criticals, or powerful enough to either make enemies faint or cower in fear.
Jester as a whole was lackluster except for that one feature, which suddenly makes Bard a competitive 3-level dip with Paladin and Rogue. That said, it's not an archetype I personally would go for when playing a straight Bard.
The feature itself isn't especially game-breaking unless the DM makes it, though. It only provides additional mobility rather than, for instance, an extra fucking turn in combat.
It's just fucking retarded to have the Aarakocra flipping head over heels in midair for 150 feet a round.
Am I wrong in reading that, by RAW, the Monk's Martial Arts feature allows you to use your Dex in place of your Str, and your scaling Martial Arts damage die in place of the standard 1d4, for improvised thrown attacks made with monk weapons?
I'm planning to run a 5e campaign in a setting with minimal to no magic. How do I rig the Cleric to be more of a medieval battlefield medic instead?
One of my players wanted to try rolling an elemental monk using this rewrite he says he found here. Should I allow it?
Eladrin as presented in the DMG is actually a 4e creation? Seems like they existed as celestial fey in 3.5 but only in the background. But 4e retconned them to make them creatures of the Feywild and shit? It's odd that elves exist along with Eladrin.
Proficiency only applies when using the weapon in accordance with its qualities. You gain proficiency when using a sword as a sword, but not when you throw it.
You'd get the proficiency bonus either way if you're using a dagger.
The question wasn't about proficiency - no one's proficient with improvised weapons unless they have the Tavern Brawler feat. The question was regarding the applicability of Martial Arts to monk weapons when used improvised.
Improvised weapons are not automatically monk weapons, but monks weapons used improvised are still monk weapons, because a thrown dagger is still a dagger and a thrown club is still a club.
Stop deliberately misreading posts.
If you are proficient with a crossbow, using it to fire small forest animals as ammo doesn't make you proficient with doing that.
If you're proficient with a sling, using it as a morning star doesn't mean you're proficient in doing so.
If you are proficient with a club, using it to stir a cauldron does not make you proficient in cooking.
If you are monk weapon with a crossbow, using it to fire small forest animals as ammo doesn't make you monk weapon with doing that.
If you're monk weapon with a sling, using it as a morning star doesn't mean you're monk weapon in doing so.
If you are monk weapon with a club, using it to stir a cauldron does not make you monk weapon in cooking.
I expect you to at least do a little work to connect the dots between proficiency with a weapon and how it correlates to a specific class' training.
They did good work in making monks less MAD than 3e: there's a selection of weapons with which they can use Dex instead of Str for attacking, and they get a "bare minimum" damage dice that scales with level that can replace the normal damage roll you'd make with your weapons.
They have 4 decent archetypes published so far, and one that's either meh or total shit depending on who you ask.
They're basically the martial hard control. Don't expect to be shitting out damage like the Fighter, but stunning multiple enemies and dropping them prone does have a charm of its own.
It's got a somewhat lower optimization ceiling than some other classes, is more disposed towards single-classing than multiclassing, and is a little less dependent on items.
>My idea for 12 fighter/8 monk would work though.
Firstly, quaterstaff is not a finesse weapon. If you use it as a monk weapon with dexterity, it deals your martial arts damage, which is 1d6 at level 8 monk.
The build is also poorly optimized, unfortunately. Let's first just discuss basics (so no novas). Compare a level 20 fighter with 20 str instead of 20 dex. For those 8 levels of monk you're gaining two unarmed attacks at 1d6, and some other interesting. What are you giving up? 2 additional attacks, both at full 1d8 (instead of the 1d6 of flurry, which also requires ki), an additional use of Action Surge, two of Indomitable, one ASI or feat, a couple of points of AC (depending on how high your wis score is), and an average of 8 HP. Also, healing from either wholeness or second wind (24 HP and 1d10+12 per LR) is severely hampered by multi-classing (though it's fairly negligible at higher levels).
Your usage of both a superiority die (5 d10s) and ki (8) is going to mean you're not going to be facing a lot of skirmishes (probably 2 or 3 at most) between rests.
The biggest problem is that your build is not only far more MAD than straight 20 monk or fighter, but also worse, both in direct comparison and in a party setting. Fighters are useful because their high ASI means they can take a good number of feats (GWM) and still keep, say, Con high. Open Hand Monk is useful specifically for lvl 17's Quivering Palm, one of the very few save or die effects left in 5e.
That's not what I'm reading from >>44729054, >>44729011 and >>44728833. They keep waffling on about proficiency for some reason when I'm specifically asking about Martial Arts applying to improvised monk weapons by RAW.
No, but it is, by RAW, an attack with a ranged weapon - which is distinct from a ranged weapon attack in this edition.
Open Hand is generally considered the best in combat for its efficiency in ki usage.
Shadow is decent at stealth, though its abilities don't help quite as much in combat, and it has the strange problem of not being able to see through the Darkness spell it can cast as a class feature.
Four Elements Monk is trash because of how ki-hungry it is, and how its abilities don't interact particularly well with the rest of the class.
>No, but it is, by RAW, an attack with a ranged weapon - which is distinct from a ranged weapon attack in this edition.
You just quoted someone telling you to stop deliberately misreading the rules.
Improvised weapons are not automatically monk weapons. You do not use your martial arts dice for improvised weapon attacks if your improvised weapon is not a monk weapon.
If you throw a club, it isn't a club; it's a poorly-balanced heavy stick flying through the air. In game terms, this is why clubs don't have the 'thrown' property.
But you've already decided you should get full ma damage progression for throwing shit, so I'm just gonna call you a pillock and we'll agree to disagree.
Alright, thanks. I like the dumb pseudo ninjaness of shadow so I think I'll give that a try. I'm not too concerned about being super optimal in combat, so long as I'm useful.
Anything in particular I should know? Mistakes to avoid, feats to build towards, etc.
I think the best Shadow Monk is a Shadow Monk with some level in rogue, expertise in perception and stealth makes him great, cunning action boost his action economy and spare his ki and assassinate his gold on him since he's very good at surprising people.
Two level of warlock dip is really strong to pick Devil's Sight so you can see in darkness when you cast it.
I was going to make a statement about the poster writing about using dex instead of str, but re-reading very carefully now, it's a bit weird.
I had always read it as "if you're using martial arts, you can use all the bullet-point rules", not "let me pick and choose from the bullet-points". I suppose if you're really picky by RAW you "can" use the martial arts benefit to use dex instead but also not use the associated MA damage die. That seems awfully silly, though.
Even so, the rest of the points stand, I believe.
>>You just quoted someone telling you to stop deliberately misreading the rules.
>Who is answering my question about the rules as written with 'rules as written don't apply here
See, now I'm wondering if you're still intentionally misreading things or if you're actually illiterate.
Proficiency and monk damage go hand in hand though
They actually don't. Monk weapons are specifically defined as below:
>monk weapons, which are shortswords and any simple melee weapons that don’t have the two-handed or heavy property
Is there any basis in the rules, beyond common sense, that states that an object ceases to be what it is if used in an unconventional manner? Martial Arts specifies nothing about how the monk weapon is used, only that an attack must be made with it.
>RAW is stupid
While this is often true, it is the only way of reading you can base theorycraft off of, short of Crawford's Twitter, because RAI is subjective based on the reading of your DM.
On the other hand, deliberately misreading posts and then replying in an utterly unhelpful manner is undoubtedly retarded.
>Martial Arts specifies nothing about how the monk weapon is used, only that an attack must be made with it.
The entire chapter on combat talks about this. A generous DM would let you throw the club, but the attack would key off your strength and deal 1 damage if it hit.
You know, you could have saved us all a lot of time, frustration, and rule-checking if you just said you hadn't read the book and were pulling all of this out of your ass.
>Newest Unearthed Arcana brings back the Blade Bard, the Jester, the Cavalier, and the Scout
Now I've played a lot of AD&D, but I've never seen anyone actually play the Cavalier, Scout, or Jester.
There were two guys who always played Blades when they wanted to play Bards though.
Was that just a failed attempt at pandering?
That's what I figured. Nothing looked exceptional.
A dip into rogue would fit the character concept I have in mind pretty well and the stealth expertise would be very welcome. How does multiclassing work with skills? No effect, right?
Each individual bullet point has a can in it. Its really not being picky to realise that means each one is an option on its own. Do you also think if you are using Great Weapon Master that have to use both the bonus attack and extra damage or neither because they are also set out in bullet points?
>...an improvised weapon is similar to an actual weapon and can be treated as such. For example, a table leg is akin to a club. At the DM's option, a character proficient with a weapon can use a similar object as if it were that weapon and use his or her proficiency bonus.
Martial arts allows you to apply its special rules to certain weapons. Improvised suggests (at DM's discretion) that the object can be treated as if it were that weapon.
In other words, to play it safe, if you throw an improvised weapon, it better be mechanically related to a weapon with the thrown keyword AND be a monk weapon for you to apply your cheese.
As a DM i'd allow, for instance, a particularly hefty rock to be improvised thrown as if it were a light hammer, in which case, as if it were a light hammer, it'd qualify for MA.
While that's a little annoying, I know a party member is a warlock with the see-in-darkness shadow so he can get some use out of it. And I think silence is plenty useful besides.
I suppose your right. With GWM the bullet points very obviously dictate different mechanics and actions (the attack choice, and the reaction to reduction to 0HP), whereas MA refers to the same damage mechanic. I'm a dumb dumb.
I'm going to assume you didn't mean to miss out the 'In many cases' from the start of that sentence, and are aware of the paragraph that deals with improvised weapons that don't already resemble existing weapons. Nonetheless, that paragraph also specifies what happens to improvised weapons that wouldn't already have the thrown property:
>If a character [...] throws a melee weapon that does not have the thrown property, it also deals 1d4 damage. An improvised thrown weapon has a normal range of 20 feet and a long range of 60 feet.
My argument here is merely that, by RAW, a quarterstaff is a quarterstaff regardless of how it's used (and not, to be clear, that it should grant proficiency under all circumstances). Is this wrong?
>Is this wrong?
Yes. Which is exactly what the text you cited says.
A quarterstaff doesn't have the thrown property. When you throw it, it's a d4, all the time, forever.
Shut the fuck up.
If by finesse you mean use your Dex to Hit and Damage yes, finesse has other factors like being used for sneak attacks which monk weapons using Dex do not unless the weapon itself has finesse.
>you didn't mean to miss out the 'In many cases
Sure, but more ambiguity doesn't do us any benefits when discussing RAW. As with all things, it's a fictional innovation, so it's always up to DM fiat.
The next paragraph, in my estimation, argues strongly against allowing MA for improvised weapons that don't have the thrown property (so I didn't bother with it. I'm trying to be helpful)
It mentions the damage SPECIFICALLY in the case of an object with no resemblance to a weapon; only those improvised weapons that are similar to a weapon are treated as such, and only those weapons are monk weapons.
>Is this wrong?
Yes. Using a non-thrown weapon as a thrown weapon changes its profile and thus is not that weapon profile (meaning no proficiency and no MA)
> it's funny, so it's allowed
Im'a assume you haven't read the back scroll and aren't the powergaming toss-happy fuckbin who started this mess:
The person proposing you'd get martial arts damage progression is a powergaming toss-happy fuckbin. Don't encourage him.
A quarterstaff doesn't have the thrown property
Which doesn't mean you can't throw it, as the improvised weapons rules demonstrate.
>When you throw it, it's a d4, all the time, forever.
Unless you're a Monk, of course?
>You can roll a d4 in place of the normal damage of your [...] monk weapon. This die changes as you gain monk levels, as shown in the Martial Arts column of the Monk table.
Because a thrown quarterstaff is still a quarterstaff.
No. You can use dex instead of strength for attack and damage rolls and opt out of the second paragraph of MA to still use the d8, but the quaterstaff itself still does not have the Finesse property which interacts with other rules.
In what was is being able to use Dex on specific improvised thrown weapons powergaming? It's strictly worse than simply using a dagger, because you don't gain proficiency.
I merely ask for clarification.
>Because a thrown quarterstaff is still a quarterstaff.
No, it's an improvised thrown weapon attack.
Read the book. Then read it again. If you can't read the book, find someone to read it for you. This isn't difficult.
Assume the Captain of the guards has a VERY strict sense of justice; he will diligently follow law to the letter and will NOT care whether the act was done with a socially positive result. So shit like Robin Hood, where he steals from the rich and give to the poor, will NOT be tolerated with and he will still be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
What's his alignment? LG or LN?
Is there recommended Wizard spell list?
I need to know which 3rd level spells would be good to choose.
Throwing the quarterstaff turns it into "improvised weapon" with stats from some kind of thrown blunt weapon, just like how beating someone with a crossbow turns the crossbow into "improvised weapon" with club stats. Throwing the crossbow would be mechanically identical to throwing the quarterstaff.
>Because a thrown quarterstaff is still a quarterstaff.
No. Let's go through the logic: A monk weapon lists quaterstaff for its abilities. RAW states that throwing a weapon that does not have the thrown property makes it "an improvised thrown weapon" that deals 1d4 damage. An improvised weapon is that weapon ("treated as such") if it used as that weapon ("a table leg akin to a club"). Since the quaterstaff is not being used as the quaterstaff in the entry (because the entry does not have the Thrown property), it is an improvised thrown weapon, not a quaterstaff.
Honestly it wouldn't surprise me at this point if he argued hitting someone with a crossbow should gain a hit bonus from Archery Fighting style because its still a ranged weapon despite you blunting a guy over the head with it.
I think LN will fit better. This character gives no shits that he was being kind or evil. All that matters is that the law was followed; no matter how morally bankrupt the enforcement method was.
Thanks for the replies though!
DESU if melee weapons are still melee weapons despite being thrown and therefore don't count under Archery Fighting style, then ranged weapons are still ranged weapons despite being used to beat people. It's only logical. So yes, you get the bonus.
Yeah, if he just plain doesn't give a fuck and just follows the law to the exact letter, he'd be LN to me too. Lawful Good means compromising and seeing the spirit of the law as equally important.
Part of why I love paladins. You get to try to be law/rule-abiding while also having to be a good guy about it.
Because thrown weapons don't use Dex, ever, unless they also have the Finesse property.
As has been said a fuckbunch of times already: an improvised thrown weapon attack is an improvised thrown weapon attack is an improvised thrown weapon attack, regardless of what you're throwing. An improvised thrown weapon is not a monk weapon.
If you throw your quarterstaff, you're doing 1d4+StrMod if you hit. You also lose your quarterstaff. The end.
>It mentions the damage SPECIFICALLY in the case of an object with no resemblance to a weapon
But it doesn't.
>If a character [...] throws a melee weapon that does not have the thrown property, it also deals 1d4 damage.
>only those improvised weapons that are similar to a weapon are treated as such, and only those weapons are monk weapons.
While I agree that your statement regarding weapon profiles is almost certainly the what will see play, I don't see that this is the case by RAW, which is my point.
But let us suppose that the weapon in question is not a quarterstaff, which was quite certainly a bad example (though I'd wonder how you'd rule if it was thrown like a spear).
Suppose it is instead a moderately-sized rock, which I would believe can quite reasonably be said to be like a club. Would throwing it in this circumstance really have much bearing on its mode of attack? Regardless of circumstance, you'd basically bashing someone with the heft of the rock, rather than relying on leverage like you would for a quarterstaff.
shit guys, I just wanted to make a Halfling that skips fucking rocks at people and doesn't have to use fucking Magic Stone why must you begrudge me this
I do not see any indication that 'improvised weapon' is mutually exclusive with all other classifications. An improvised melee weapon attack is still a melee weapon attack, and an improvised attack with a melee weapon is still an attack with a melee weapon.
An improvised thrown weapon attack is an improvised thrown weapon attack, but an thrown attack with a quarterstaff is still technically an attack with a quarterstaff.
By the same RAW that states that Archery provides a bonus to nets and darts but not thrown daggers, yes.
By RAI, I have no idea - Crawford has made some really strange decisions in the past.
By the houserules any sane DM would use, no.
But I have specified numerous times that the question I am asking is in specific regard to RAW, because that's the only thing you can unequivocally rely on when theorycrafting if Crawford is silent and you can't ask your DM.
Its the exact same argument. As >>44729768
says much like the Quarterstaff is apparently still a quarterstaff with its quality of being a Monk weapon, the crossbow is is still a crossbow with the quality of being a ranged weapon. RAW archery gives a bonus when using a ranged weapon to attack.
>Suppose it is instead a moderately-sized rock, which I would believe can quite reasonably be said to be like a club.
>Would throwing it in this circumstance really have much bearing on its mode of attack?
Yes, because they're referencing two different things. One is the rock being used as a club. The other is a rock being thrown. Now, you might say it's like a light hammer, or if it's pointy-shaped, like a dagger. Then it would use those profiles.
However, the prior situation specifically entails a non-thrown weapon being thrown, not an improvised weapon using the profile of a weapon that has the thrown property.
RAW they are. The first paragraph of improvised weapons refers to using improvised weapons in relation to existing weapon profiles. The second paragraph refers to using an improvised weapon that does not match a profile. In such a case, for instance, your quaterstaff being thrown does not match its profile (because it does not have the thrown property). Therefore it is treated as an improvised thrown weapon, NOT as an existing weapon profile.
It's not RAW. Hitting someone over the head with a crossbow doesn't use the crossbow's profile (is not a ranged attack, and none of its properties (except heavy) apply), so the improvised weapon rules suggest that it be substituted for another weapon profile (the whole "table leg is akin to a club"). This new weapon profile is not a ranged weapon, so Archery fighting style doesn't provide its attack bonus.
> but not thrown daggers
Did you even read the PHB? Pg. 147
>If a weapon as the thrown property, you can throw the weapon to make a RANGED attack.
PHB pg. 72.
>You gain a +2 bonus to attack rolls you make with RANGED weapons
PHB 193 and 194 use the words Ranged Attack Weapon together to describe attacks and making attacks. Therefore, Archery applies
Attacking with advantage is more important on average. If you know the secondary effect will go off, that helps. Then, sure. Go for it. Just remember you could be standing safely out of harm's way sniping instead.
Throwing a weapon that is not suitable for throwing deals as much damage as the DM thinks is appropriate and you are not proficient. That's the most comprehensive answer I can give you, since I'm not your DM.
He was asking about RAW, not the FAQ. The PHB RAW does not distinguish between ranged attacks and ranged weapons. PHB pg 195 refers specifically to the handaxe as making a ranged attack.
>When you make a ranged attack... hurl a handaxe...
Yes a hand axe is ranged attack. It is not a ranged weapon, it is a melee weapon with the thrown property. Ranged weapons are the weapons below the title 'Ranged Weapons' on both the simple and martial weapons lists. Archery gives a bonus when using a ranged weapon, not a ranged attack thus the jokes about clubbing someone with a crossbow.
The Sunless Citadel is a fun little dungeon delve for 3e, it converts over decently enough for a little 1- or 2-session adventure. Just remember to redo the trap DCs and rebalance the encounters accordingly.
You don't even need 2 hands for it; GWM RAW just requires the weapon to have the Heavy keyword and proficiency.
RAW is silly, especially in a game that has this little granularity and openly uses words like "suggest".
It's almost as much fun as the 3.PF Crossbow+Tower Shield.
Where the crossbowman would hide behind his tower shield to gain concealment for himself and his equipment (including the tower shield).
>OGL for 3rd-party people to use the open SRD
>"DM's Guild" for Wizards-Approved, community-rated stuff with the possibility of getting (offered to be) printed in official 5e stuff
This is actually pretty good.