>Official /5eg/ Mega Trove, contains all official 5e stuff:
>Pastebin with homebrew list, resources and so on:
>OGL and SRD for 5e
>February Unearthed Arcana is Psionics
Favorite kind of psion?
>Favorite kind of psion?
The easy kind
Alternatively the Ardent although I'd like to see some of the old psionic PrCs remade into archetypes for the existing classes: i.e.
Divine Mind = Paladin
Psionic domain for Cleric
Shadow Mind for Rogue
Cerebremancer for Wizard
Abolisher for Ranger
And make up something for Bard, Monk, Barbarian
So, the other day I posted here on /5eg/ about making a Sun Soul Monk/Mood Druid and basically turning into a laser shooting octopus (or snake). I brought it up at my table last night and the rulesy guy said that it doesn't work because monsters/beasts don't take the attack action. Example: Giant Poisonous Snake has the "Bite" action in its stat block. I have looked over several sources, but I can't find anything that explicitly says that monsters and beasts can take the attack action.
On page 11 of the Monster Manual it says:
>When a monster takes its action, it can choose from the options in the Actions section of its stat block or use one of the actions available to all creatures, such as the Dash or Hide action, as described in the Player's Handbook.
Dash and Hide are listed beside the Attack action in the PHB, but I'm not sure if that's justification enough.
So: Can monsters/beasts take the attack action?
I've always liked OP image because beneath him and Stormbringer is just nothingness, a void left by a sword which takes everything.
it's possible to make a thrown weapon character but it's not really viable. the most you can make is 3 attacks (twf using your action to throw one weapon, bonus action to throw the other, then drawing one weapon for free as part of a move action and throwing it with your second attack). early on you'll have decent damage but you'll scale off compared to other martials once they get extra attacks and other goodies. a level 20 twf fighter with make 5 attacks while you're stuck still making 3.
I don't see why not. Under the two-weapon fighting rules, you can throw with the second attack (as long as it's a light melee weapon).
So you could dual wield handaxes or light hammers and throw two of them per turn. Pick up the two-weapon fighting style and the Dual Wielder feat for extra damage, faster draws, and (I think) the ability to dual-throw spears.
The "bite" ability, taken straight from the wolf in the monster manual.
Bite. MELEE WEAPON ATTACK: +4 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target.
Hit: 7 (2d4 + 2) piercing damage. Ifthe target is a creature,
it must succeed on a DC 11 Strength saving throw or be
>jesus this better be bait
Why is everyone in these threads so pissy and act like they're on the verge of going postal?
Relax. Don't answer the question next time, me or someone else will take care of it, no need to stress.
>Why is everyone in these threads so pissy and act like they're on the verge of going postal?
That's just the nature of this place as far as I can tell. Over-aggression is typical of the mentally deficient.
I dislike Psionics, to me it being a different resource system just felt unnecessary, since it isn't equal to traditional casting, in some regards its stronger and others weaker. To me that's a problem because all Psionics never seen to know exactly what a Psionic does and it comes off as just magic but harder to resist. Which makes it better than normal magic.
I guess my biggest issue is that, Psionics seem like they belong in a different system than DnD.
I feel like people can discuss the rules and intricacies of any system here... Except d&d.
Someone doesn't understand a rule, correct it (or don't) and move on. No one is intentionally pretending not to understand how something works on the off chance it might make someone angry.
In 3.5 most of the problems with Psionics went away if you did two things:
1. Psionics is affected by everything that magic is affected by, anti-magic fields, buffs, debuffs, counter spells etc etc
2. Follow the Rules of Psionics, you can't use all 300 points in one mind spell, you have a cap of some sort determined by the rules.
The rest of the problems in 3.5 were that a lot of the ideas were crazy or just poor.
I remember there was a class where you slowly turned into a Mindflayer, I forget the name.
But dumping 4 feats on brain-eating really didn't make you any better than a generic psion
Archetypes/traditions or sub-classes as I call them are all lvl3 features.
If you are going to go with high charisma on your swashbuckler the you might want to pick up magic initiate to get Green flame blade etc. since it's pretty great as a combo.
Oh please, because the wild mage and dragon furry are totally worth their own class.
The monk's "thief except without armor or weapons" and "shittier druid" schools are unnecessary, just make their one useful school a fighter/barbarian offshoot.
>Specifically, the conundrum of "failure doesn't have any consequences".
>Solutions like "only one roll allowed" aren't intuitive.
Are you retarded?
If you don't know something the first time you roll, why the fuck would you be even allowed a reroll? Surely, if you don't know something, you don't magically get another chance to know it.
So I am coming from the last thread all of you guys have been incredible helpful with my obnoxious Sword logic Palock I thank you for it. After much careful review I think I may just multiclass. It seems a lot less work, and it would just give me more versatility. I am asking you guys what is the the best build for Pact of blade Warlock Paladin? I heard it was 3 Paladin and 17 Warlock is this true?
Picture related the best kind of logic.
I said it wasn't intuitive, not that it wasn't a solution.
If you're in combat, and you whiff your attack, you can't try again because you've used your action for the turn.
If you lie to someone, and you botch the deception roll, you can't just try again because the NPC is outraged at your attempted deception and is in a different mental state.
If you try to climb a wall, and fail the DC, you can totally try again, but you fell down and took damage, so the situation has changed.
Knowledge rolls are the only rolls that don't affect the outside world. They don't have any tangible affect that prevents multiple attempts, other than "you just can't." The situation doesn't change. The DM just tells you that your character doesn't know it.
Surely that's not fucking satisfactory to you?
You can't even attempt them unless it makes sense for your character.
This also cuts down on everyone at the table saying, "Let me try!" for every knowledge check, and those incidents where only the savage barbarian somehow knows all about the history of a church (which is funny the first time, as everyone tries to come up with wacky explanations, but it gets old).
>Surely that's not fucking satisfactory to you?
Yes. Yes it is. Because the question here is "Does the character know [X]". If he succeeds, then the character knows [X]. If he fails, then the character doesn't know [X]. How the character reacts and responds to the situation varies and changes depending on their knowledge, and affects how they will use their skillset in this particular challenge.
I do not see the problem with this.
My DM for some retarded reason does turns outside of combat AND in combat, how shit is this?
he also never rolls for initiative or anything similar.
It's just around the table counterclockwise or clockwise depending on if one player is sitting on his left or his right side.
Was planning on making an Assassin, but with how he plays I basically can't.
Is there any way I can convince him to stop doing this?
Should I just be re-rolling another character, since half the party gets to go before me at any given time, and uses that time to roll anything I would be rolling for or ruin my chances at stealth?
If you gotta stay in the group and can't get him to change, re-roll probably or talk with the party. IC or OOC, you can tell them to start using readied actions to trigger once you make your move and fucking ambush bitches.
But Id say talk to your DM first and if that fails you might be best served leaving the group altogether.
I disagree with both of you, to an extent. I don't believe knowledge rolls should be something you can just keep trying in all situations, but I would have it be a matter of degrees of failure, or rather making a check against a ladder of DCs with a single roll, with the potential of making another roll if something would happen that would remind you of other information you would have forgotten or half-forgotten.
Say you want to make a knowledge check--you got a 12. You know this DC 10 information, but not the more arcane or lesser known DC 15 information.
If you observe something closely related to the DC 15 information, or happen to look through a topical (and not inaccurate) reference book (which would also grant advantage as per usual), you can make another check.
Or if I'd feel it would propel the story or scene I might just tell you that information without another check being involved or needed.
I'd do a different system unless you just want something Deadpool-ish.
A max-level Champion fighter would actually get you most of the way there. That plus a teleportation belt and being practically made out of scar tissue, and you have an obvious expy.
If you don't want/can't do a max level character than you can't play a ridiculous superhuman and you should get used to that fact.
Which level would be the most fun to run a one-shot super adventure, maybe 2 or 3 sessions long? When do spells and abilities really come together for players? What level do you start encountering the most exciting and challenging monsters?
3. You have your class features and archetypes and make enough choices about spells, weapons, etc. without slowing the game down.
You can use at least half of the monsters in the Monster Manual, the higher CR ones are obvious "boss" monsters and they're boring.
Plus the low level means you can't use the spell Bypass Obstacles. You have to use your wits or you'll fall into the chasm and die.
Go run a fun, low-level game, Anon.
I assume they meant a one-shot as in the adventure books or similar story so they can have a build up to a climactic event - but they cannot play for a whole evening. So instead of a 2 hour campaign they break up the play time of an adventure book into a few smaller sessions. It's what my group usually has to do since we all have weird work schedules.
20 - You know 1+1=2 when they're scalar quantities. If they're vectorial quantities, the result is something between 0 and 2, included.
10 - You know 1+1=2
1 - You're pretty sure 1+1=3
What new pacts and patrons do people want to see for the warlock? I'd like necromantic patron of some kind and a pact that let's you hulk out like pic related. Also a spell or invocation for conjuring fiends would be nice.
At level 3 everyone has their archtype by then
At 4 people can finally pick up feats
at 5 martials get two attacks, and casters finally get their level 3 spells (The fireballs, hastes, flies, and lightning bolts that really define their choice of caster)
All are good places, though be aware that level 5 is a huge powerspike relative to the rest of the game.
Plus, starting at 4 or 5 means you might start with a permanent magical item without breaking the math, especially if it's a High-magic setting. That can be an interesting way to have entirely different sorts of characters because you can justify different backgrounds and setting involvement.
Especially if you also use those magic item trait/minor property tables.
i won't shit up the general thread any more but i don't think that word means what you think it means
bait is a dude asking if a monster attacking with the bite attack is the attack action
Needing to do damage for that long is just theorycrafting, when you can already do enough damage to kill a big old red dragon before you run outta fightan juice killing it faster is probably more important than being able to keep shooting long after its dead.
The sorlock has more utility, sure. But fighter man is always the king of damage this edition.
Also leveling on fighter you would deal much more damage earlier on than sorlock.
So I played a halfling rogue up till 5th level and without meaning to, he basically became a dagger throwing machine because it worked so well with the sneak attack rules. Combat was very intense and fun -- I was tumbling, hiding behind other characters, or double-throwing every round while spells and other fancy moves were going off all around me. That said, I wasn't above using a bow when it came to assassinating enemy spell-casters. So a pure throw-guy? No. But a badass rogue who whirls around in a flurry of daggers. Fuck yes.
>Needing to do damage for that long is just theorycrafting
Maybe is just my group, but my GM does a lot of encounters separated by small distances so no short rest allowed, also, so far, I've seen 1-2 short rests on average with 6-8 encounters per day with all the GMs I played.
You call it "theorycrafting" I think is in fact more realistical on how 5e works, you get very few short rests, sometimes you don't get any in a couple of short rest, so you think your 6 maneuvers are going to be enough for all your encounters ever, I don't think so.
8d10 + 8*5 = average of 84 damage per round
5d6 + 5*15 = average of 92.5 damage per round
eh its pretty close. fighters accuracy is a bit worse, but he can use precise strike or whatever the accuracy maneuver is to help himself out. also he can action surge when he wants to to kick out an extra 4d6 + 4*15 = 74 damage in a round.
anyway the question was about an archer though, not a caster
>tfw your DM keeps count of your bolts
>ftw he doesn't let you to have more than 60 at any time
I think he hates me, enemies don't have bolts, they always use bows, and I have to make my own, which means spending lots of hours that some times we can't spare
The fighter does a boatload more damage early on, and more consistently. It is only later on that the Warlock can even begin to compete on the same level. If we are doing level 20 comparisons, pcs can probably hack rests whenever they want to with shit like demiplane.
Unless you actually have experience with rests at level 20 and how DMs stop this shit without houserules I'm pretty sure you're just talking out of your ass here.
Paladin/Favored Soul works better
But there're two paths:
Depending if you want lots of smites or auras
I played a DevotionPal3/Undyinglight6/Draconicsorcerer6 in a high level game using GFB a lot, had an awesome time
>>tfw he doesn't let you to have more than 60 at any time
on the one hand i understand, on the other they do only way 1.5 pounds for 20. you could probably lug more than 4.5 pounds of bolts around if that was really your shtick. can you ask the barbarian (or whoever) to also lug some around for you?
can you recollect your crossbow bolts off of bodies?
I think definitely because Scrying says:
>A creature that can see invisible objects sees the sensor as a luminous orb about the size of your fist.
which means that its actually there, meaning that if you cast detect magic you would detect it.
I've always thought of it as if you can't see something, but know where it is, in the sense that you know the space occupied by the evil creature and could point to it, but you don't see the creature itself.
You would sense it (because it's magical), but you would not be able to see the aura (because the spell specifies the auras only appear around visibile creatures and objects). You would also learn the school of magic associated with it (divination).
Naw, all you'd get at best is that it's in that general direction - It takes a few turns of dedicated concentration with Detect spells to get anything more than a general direction of the auras, so if the invisible evil thing moves in that time it'd go away.
I don't know if it's in 5e but in 3.pf there's a rule that Detect Magic doesn't work on Invisibility. However, it's hard to find and I've almost never seen it invoked properly.
Then again, I've never seen the Detect spells played to their actual rules in a very, very long time, people tend not to read it.
I don't know, detect magic says:
>For the duration, you sense the presence of magic
wilhin 30 feet of you. ]f you sense magic in Ihis way, you can use your action to see a faint aura around any visible creature OI'object in the area that bears magic, and you learn its school of magic. if any.
Which implies to me it would detect magic within 30 feet of you, but you couldn't pinpoint where it is, and because you can't pinpoint where it is, you can't detect what school it is.
So I revise my original statement, and I think that if you cast detect magic you would know there is some magic around you, but not what.
If you also cast See Invisibility, you could (obviously) see the sensor as detailed in the Scrying spell, and if you had that and Detect Magic up at the same time (which you can because See Invisibility doesn't require concentration), you could both see the sensor, and, if you didn't know what it was, Detect Magic would tell you it was Divination magic.
Really? That vague? So, I could hide an invisible evil creature in front of/behind a non-evil creature and the paladin would be led to believe that the non-evil creature is evil?
>wilhin 30 feet of you. ]f you sense magic in Ihis way, you can use your action to see a faint aura around any visible creature OI'object in the area that bears magic, and you learn its school of magic. if any.
wow sorry I copy and pasted from a pdf of the phb but its fucked up. I didn't notice before I posted sorry.
>For the duration, you sense the presence of magic within 30 feet of you. If you sense magic in this way, you can use your action to see a faint aura around any visible creature or object in the area that bears magic, and you learn its school of magic, if any.
Ah, well this clearly states visible.
As with detect evil
>For the duraton, you know if there is an aberraton, celestal, elemental, fey, fend, or undead within
30 feet of you, as well as where the creature is located. Similarly, you know if there is a place or
object within 30 feet of you that has been magically consecrated or desecrated
Detect Evil and Good says:
>For the duration, you know if there is an aberration, celestial, elemenlal, fey, fiend, or undead within 30 feet of you, as well as where the creature is located. Similarly, you know if there is a place or object within 30 feet of you that has been magically consecrated or desecrated.
So you don't need to see with Detect Evil and Good. You find out where it is, even though you can't see it.
The barbarian from the other day here; The welcome my group received at the temple of the town I caused a ruckus at was worse than expected, so I decided to separate from the group and
start to craft my bear totem amuleton the town's outer fields, to let the group identify, gather information, and buy adventuring needs, for our next dungeon; A tomb.
So here I've got a few questions as to how to proceed; What are we likely to find on such a place as catacombs, where spirits and similars are sure to be unwelcoming to outsiders, and how do we deal with them? In the case my character survives the dungeon, would there be a chance to go back to the town, were anything to happen inside that would require of my attention?
>yes, thank you. So what I said originally is correct then. You know where an invisible creature is if it is evil/good.
Not exactly sure which anon is you because I'm dumb and bad at keeping track of conversations, but what you said here sounds correct to me.
I'm making a warlock and I'm trying to decide what spells and invocations to take besides Hex and Agonizing Blast. Is it better to specialize in illusions, charms, or battlefield control as a straight blastlock?
What? This only applies to celestial, fiend, or undead.
Detect evil applies to more types. What is odd however is that both the description of divine sense and detect evil/good doesn't actually literally state the creature has to be good or evil aligned to be detected,(even though this seems heavily implied to me)
>a devil does not choose to be
>awful evil, and it doesn't tend toward lawful >evil, >but rather it is lawful evil in its essence. If it >somehow ceased to be lawful evil, it would cease >to be a devil.
but here it says that purifying semon demons into waifus is still a thing in 5ed
Is this a good idea for a character: Mulhorandi Human (variant) Far Traveller Fighter? He's a (weaker) version of my old 2E character who (due to a wand of wonder) got time shifted to the year 1489 DR.
I never noticed how close to WoL magic 5ed's description is:
In casting a spell,
a character carefully plucks at the invisible strands of
raw magic suffusing the world, pins them in place in a
particular pattern, sets them vibrating in a specific way,
and then releases them to unleash the desired effect
>without the Weave, raw magic is locked away and inaccessible; the most powerful archmage can't light a candle with magic in an area where the Weave has been tom.
almost exactly the same now. Always loved WoT spellcasting.
>I'd like necromantic patron
Undying Patron is a thing, yo.
>What new pacts and patrons do people want to see for the warlock?
Nature spirit, since Druids aren't really so much "Commune with nature" and more "Blast about lasers and become a bear".
Fucking make Blade worth anyone's time first. Right now it makes you... a worse soulknife, really.
>I think he hates me, enemies don't have bolts, they always use bows, and I have to make my own, which means spending lots of hours that some times we can't spare
What is the rest of the party composed of?
Except that's not their defining feature! Their defining feature is capability in all forms of armour and weaponry!
That's kind of the things for Champion, and you know what? Champion should have expertise in Athletics or if you're generous a choice of one DEX or STR skill.
I don't want to cheapen rogues or bards in their skill-monkey niche, but the prescedent is already set for Bannerets. And I can make a better tracker using a bard or a rogue with the exception of favoured terrain/favoured enemy and scouts tend to be better too. And that shouldn't fucking happen!
The ranger class is entirely based on someone who is really fucking good at survival.
I'm looking for everything available to PCs to directly counteract spells and their effects.
14th Level Abjuration Wizard gives you advantage on spell-related saving throws, and resistance to spell-based damage.
7th Level Ancients Paladin gives you resistance to damage from spells.
Bardic Inspiration is what it is.
Finally, the following spells help in some way: Warding Bond, Silence, Resistance, Holy Aura, Dispel Magic, Counterspell, Circle of Power, Bless, Antimagic Field.
Is there anything I've overlooked? Haven't checked the expansions yet.
If you actually want to blend your swordplay and sorcery, you have to go paladin/sorcerer. Between quicken spell and smite you can actually attack and cast spells on the same turn, and both will be meaningful with just a few levels in either class.
Perhaps someone can answer this age old question for me. Why do Dark Elves/Drow have black skin and white hair and eyes? Not a fluff reason, i'm looking for a design reason. I've heard that Gygax wanted them to be the photo-negative of normal elves, which is a cool idea but I haven't found any citations and quotes for this.
>So an elemental patron?
Sure, I guess that could work.
> I feel like both of your examples would still qualify as fey, just more inhuman fey.
I guess, but the thing is that reskinning the Patron doesn't reskin the Invocations and spells you get from it, and some of those aren't really that appropriate the more you diverge from purely European concepts.
>>What new pacts and patrons do people want to see for the warlock?
>Nature spirit, since Druids aren't really so much "Commune with nature" and more "Blast about lasers and become a bear".
I feel like http://www.dmsguild.com/product/170851/Class--Shaman is relevant to you.
>a shitty wizard, a shitty fighter
Thats basically your only two options for any class besides wizard and fighter, yes
Should I go for Lock 17/ Sorc 3 so I can at least get access to 9th level Warlock spells that'd fit the character from an RP perspective? (stuff like Imprisonment) or should I go for Lock 2/ Sorc 18 to have more spell slots but not be as fluffy?
Because having the ability to burn a sorcery point to have a 1200 ft. range Eldritch Blast that may and or may not be empowered plus many more spells in my arsenal tickles my autism.
That's the cool part, but the rest of the Realms was being screwed over (especially in 4E, despite my love for that system). Now he is gonna rock in some 122 years after the wand of wonder incident.
you'll honestly be more powerful just keeping up your warlock progression. maybe post level 10 it would be worth dipping, as after that warlocks kind of start falling off as they for whatever reason get a worse version of higher level spell access than every other class that gets 6-9 level spells.
but i'd just go straight lock until then at least.
I can't find out why anyone would take a Champion Fighter. It seems so severely limited compared to both of the other martial archetypes. The best things it has going for it are really just a wide crit range? We're talking an extra 10% chance to do double damage. Its big ability at level 18 is fasthealing (likely 8-10 depending on how you build.) What's the goal here? Take TWF and Defense fighting styles, and then try to attack as many times as possibly per round? I'm guessing you'd take Lucky and Duel Wielder as feats. Perhaps Magic Initiate so that you can grab True Strike?
Am I missing something? Why would anyone play this?
this isn't what you want but I have a character that I play when my group does like... our B side campaign that is kind of sword saint esque. Hes a paladin 2/war cleric 2.
Big burst damage with his great sword, otherwise hes like... saintly and casting guidance all the time.
If you mean the pathfinder samurai archetype, hes not that, obviously, but I think flavor wise he fits into my conception of how a sword saint is.
Our side campaign is pretty open to homebrew and wackier stuff, so I think I'm going to ask my DM to let me swear an Oath of Devotion but get some Oath of Vengeance abilities to represent his sword fighting prowess vs his actual magical ability (which is low and much more subtle).
Because they want to be a tough motherfucker and like critting a lot.
Its mechanically not very sound compared to Battlemaster or EK, but its not weak, per se, as the fighter chassis is already really, really strong.
I'm in two campaigns, and in both the fighter took the Champion archetype. Both of them use greatswords I think. I know one does. The other might actually use a long sword idk that campaign has been on hiatus.
I think if you want to play a not magical fighter, its either pick battlemaster which is very front loaded and imo kind of lame, just to tack on some maneuvers every once in a while (both campaigns are also not a lot of resting between adventuring), or you pick champion and crit twice as often.
It's a simple, easy to understand option that I wish someone in my party would have taken instead of playing an EK while dumping int and not understanding how spells work.
Gotcha. The thing about rests is interesting. In a harsh environment campaign, Champion really shines. I think Battlemaster is cool but I get what you mean about it being frontloaded.
It DOES look like Champion is the tankiest of them all, so I definitely can't rule it out for that alone.
Because the other Fighter archetypes don't fit the character concept as well? Maybe I don't want to play some gay spellcaster or limp-wristed tactical bitch. Maybe I just want to bro out with my swords & shit.
I've been kind of wanting to make a Tiefling or maybe a Eladrin (or some other spell casting race) Champion, and then talking my DM into letting me take one of the dragon mark feats, taking magic initiate, and taking ritual caster, and being a badass fighter but also having a pretty solid number of spells I could cast. And maybe a magic sword that can cast spells? Idk.
But I'll probably end up DMing the next campaign we do so we'll see.
I'm back and figured out the wombo-est melee-based anti-mage. Unfortunately, you can't get Antimagic Field, but you might as well, because ain't none of that magic touching you.
X Cleric 8/Ancients Paladin 8/EK 4, Mage Slayer and possibly Sentinel
Cleric domain doesn't really matter, but it gives you full caster levels, bonus action attacks, and reliable anti-necromancer abilities. Some of the domains also give you heavy armor off the bat that you wouldn't get in the multiclassing to come.
Ancients Paladin gives you Extra Attack, a fighting style, and spell damage resistance.
EK gets you AS, and by taking it to 4th level last, you can nab counterspell.
I'm well aware that this is a level 20 progression that requires multiple high scores to be particularly useful. I just find theorycrafting and telling spellcasters to suck it fun.
hey /5eg/ If you were currently Dming, how would you feel about an arcane trickster running low on poison/completely out of poison attempting to use poison spray to slowly amass more in a container (somehow) or to coat their weapons in poison?
I'm that AT, I really want to poison shit, but I'm really unsure if I should take this cantrip on the off chance my DM goes fuck no.
>INB4 The spell makes poison gas not liquid.
you still pretty much want to just attack as none of your spells will scale well with your level. a lot of your spell slots will be spent casting shield. you probably want an aoe spell or two, hold person/monster style spells, and the rest defensive/buff/utility spells.
get greenflame blade for sure too
Eldritch Knight doesn't get 3rd level slots till level 13 champ.
You'd be an 11th level multiclass spellcaster, so you'd have a 6th level slot, but you won't be able to learn any Wizard spells higher than those you can learn as a 4th level EK i.e. 1st level
Alright, thanks muchly anons.
Guess I'm just gonna take GFB or Booming Blade instead.
The fact that you cant use either with a crossbow/bow is pretty annoying, though, same with GFB -having- to hit a different creature.
>green fire leaps to a Different creature of your choice that you can see within 5 feet of it
unless it got erratad, don't see why either spell is that great, apart from maybe cunning action disengaging with BB and making them take damage to chase you.
>I have to be within melee range of -anything-
>that anything has to have a buddy there next to it that can also rape my face
My character is unlucky.
She has peter parker's luck.
Damn. I thought the wording in multiclass spellcasting was weird, now I understand why.
Well, in that case, you could just knock a level off of Paladin and miss out on an ASI in exchange for a 5th level in Sorc/Lock, since they synergize with the Cha casting of Paladin. That actually makes this slightly less MAD, but HP would suffer.
>that anything has to have a buddy there next to it that can also rape my face
you don't need another guy when you're using BB, and like I said I think it was clarified in a tweet or some shit that you don't need the second guy for gfb either, but if there is one then why wouldn't you want to hit them and get the damage on both?
you have uncanny dodge (well maybe not yet) and cunning action, are you really taking so much damage?
Sounds like the cleric in my OotA group. She is a water cleric who had to be saved from drowning, Pissed off a drow diplomat after we managed to loose the drow slavers, and is he really known to bring bad luck to any action she attempts in.
On a side note though GFB on rogue is really nice once you get to lvl 5 and beyond. It really is just free bonus damage.
oh I see where I fucked up.
I'm only 3 right now so GFB is only good for a possible second target an extra 3ish damage, but once I hit 5 it hits the first target as well as the second for the same damage.
Made a "dedicated healer" homebrew class, tell me what you think
No. Bad. Stop it.
The rest seems alright if you want to have arcane magic healers instead of or in addition to divine healers for setting reasons. Thaumaegis should probably be concentration, and the targeting rules are a little clunky. I'd say make it range self choose any number of targets within 60 feet, but that's just me.
A player wants to tank with his Barbarian, and he seems very unsatisfied with the facts that Barbs are basically "go all out and then be useless for a while."
How do I make a Barbarian Tank and keep the flavor? Or should I tell him to fuck off and pick Fighter
>soothe healing cantrip
yeah, gotta agree.
The only during a combat encounter matters little to nothing.
>party is half dead
>friends/hold person/anything that stops enemy attacking until they're attacked
>with one enemy left
Congrats, you just gave leave to heal up the entire party for however long the delay lasts.
Especially since it's a potential full heal for some classes at first level, especially if you roll for stats and get high on your spellcasting mod.
Something really neat: some of the pact of the chain warlock familiars give their master advantage on all saving throws against magic as long as they're within 10ft
You can get this from level 3
Change the dex saving throw proficiency to int saving throw prociciency, and the healing cantrip needs work. I'm not opposed to there being a healing cantrip but it should have limits. The limits on it atm are a bit weak and wonky. Instead, try making it a 1 min cast time, and can only heal people up to half their max HP. Allow it to be used on unconscious people and allow out of combat use though. I think that would be more useful and more balanced.
If it's not friends or something that makes them non-hostile they're still trying to break out of it and kill you
If that doesn't fly-
Then you "restart" combat
assassin now gets a second use of assassinate on a still held enemy, since they cant possibly go before someone initiating combat.
There's probably some other dumb stuff that can only be done "once" per combat, but I can't think of it.
I like that, yeah, chane it to Last round, and maybe the current (if you might be last in the turn order)
Yeah, it's in their monster manual entry for I think quasits and pseudo dragons. Imps too, but that one's more obscure because the bit that says they share magic resistance is in a small box three or four pages previous.
Healing up to half out of combat effectively for free I don't like.
This version >>45293470 seems pretty reasonable.
Still not a huge fan of healing cantrips on principal, but I don't really think it would be unbalanced if restricted to the last round.
The only problem is your familiar from pact of the chain is not the actual creature, but a fey spirit that takes that creatures form and personality on, since it is summoned with find familiar still. Just what I have been told about this, your DM can rule otherwise.
Report from the third session of my new campaign:
>Wizard almost died at one point, but then I realized that I really my encounter wasn't really balanced so I just admitted my new DM mistake and fixed stuff
>Party then proceeds to kill a green dragon wyrmling in one turn. It critfailed its only attack.
>I need to take more notes on areas and stuff so I'm not scrambling to make things up
>I should also try less obvious foreshadowing in some cases
I think that needs some citation because if you get no actual benefits from the expanded familiar choice list that pact of the chain gives you, then the book pact is literally the only one ever worth taking.
Seriously, you would just take the book pact and learn the find familiar ritual.
If an encounter becomes obviously unbalanced, I tend to either give the party an escape route (Which still rewards XP, if you're the kind of DM that keeps up with that shit) or gives them an environmental factor to take advantage of/rebalance. Ballistas, boulders, etc.
I just started playing 5e with some friends after not playing much D&D for awhile.
Playing a Paladin I thought was pretty solid. Just got level 2 fairly quickly and can do 1d8+5 with my longsword and smite twice a day for good burst.
However the Rogue seems to be pumping out two 1d6+5 attacks a round and the warlock is blasting off 1d10+something even higher and then another 1d6.
I am feeling really lost here, no idea where these big numbers are coming from so consistently.
The spell description says spirit, without the fey qualifier. You can choose whether the familiar you summon is fey, celestial, or fiend though. From what I just looked up, it seems really nitpicky to say that the familiar from Find Familiar doesn't actually count as the thing you chose it to be. If you want to interpret it that way that's fine, but it seems like a rather pointless nerf on very, very technical grounds.
Just no. DMG specifically states NOT to have a healing cantrip and to NOT give wizards access to healing magic as then they shit all over clerics.
Pls think a little instead of trying to make everything oh so pretty.
Fucks sake, all homebrew needs is UA level formatting. Just put it in a text document instead of all that shit
Well in truth a party can heal up to almost max with a short rest. A healing cantrip can become broken pretty easy but healing in general is also not a great hassle anymore so I don't see why you would be so restrictful on a healing cantrip as well.
Also it may be somewhat free but it's time consuming as well. A minute per heal will take awhile to heal up someone if they are badly hurt. If they are not badly hurt then at most they will only get one heal anyways since it caps at half HP.
What fighting style did you take?
If the rogue is TWF with shortswords they'll be pulling off at most 3d6+Dex in a turn across two attacks. It eats a bonus action though, and if you've got a longsword (and I assume a shield) you have higher AC and way more HP.
The warlock one sounds right, Hex + Eldritch Blast + Agonizing Blast. Again, you have higher AC and way more HP.
Damage output is all over the place for the lower levels, but you'll be pulling ahead at 5th onward, trust me. Keep in mind that you also have some healing with lay on hands, and you can forgo smiting to do some magic paladin bullshit.
>rogue seems to be pumping out two 1d6+5 attacks
he's probably doing 2d6+5 and not 1d6+5 twice (unless he's twf). he's getting the extra 1d6 likely because of sneak attack. you'll catch up in the damage department once you get multiple attacks. you're for sure much more defensively powerful than the rogue since you get heavy armor, shields, and a bigger hit die.
>warlock is blasting off 1d10+something even higher then another 1d6
your warlock probably used hex in combination with his eldritch blast + agnonizing blast.
since you're using a longsword, you should be using a shield. your AC is going to be higher than them and your HP is going to be higher too. around level 5 or so you'll start pulling ahead in damage.
>with dm approval
I hate rules like that. I get that everything is subject to rule 0 but it should at least have some sort of reference as to how it /should/ be so overconservative dms don't simply err on the side of caution for the sake of caution.
It's like the wild magic sorcerer's rolls and when to recharge tides of chaos - it's ridiculous how it's essentially 'how well this mechanic works depends on how well your dm remembers it exists and how much he likes you'
Well I planned to make a pact of the chain warlock awhile ago and that's what my DM ruled. Also here is a sage advice link for that ruling. Of course if your DM rules in favor of letting you get that shared magic resistance with your familiar that's awesome, I'm just sharing my experience in the matter.
The real power in the Chain pact is the Chains of Carceri invocation. You can be functionally in two places at once, one of which is invisible with a flying speed, with no limit on distance as long as you're on the same plane. It's not hard to use that ability to tear a campaign wide open through social fuckery alone.
I'm confused as to how Chains of Carceri breaks a campaign wide open, to be honest. You can cast Hold Monster once per day per celestial/fiend/elemental you encounter without using a spell slot or material components.
Not sure on the rogue but the warlock is most likely using agonizing blast invocation and his hex spell. It can pump out solid enough damage. Since you are lvl 2 you could use divine favor to pump up your damage by a D4 each attack for one combat. If you feel you need to.
In truth the chain familiars are still superior to normal familiars. they are stronger, can deliver messages, can turn invisible and change shape. Unless you plan to go owl the best any other familiar can do is scout some and be a good RP pet.
That's why I think the spell resistance is an interesting 'balancer' - it only works when it's within 10 feet of you so you need to choose one or the other advantage at any time.
It's a shame you can't cast spells through your familiar beyond 100 feet. But I definitely see the potential in having a shapeshifting, intelligent pair of eyes and ears that is invisible and flying anywhere on the same plane of existence as you.
Homebrewing a monster that is susceptible to turn undead, how would I word this?
So far I've got:
Turn Susceptibility: X is affected by effects that turn undead.
I find this inelegant but I've looked through the MM and I can't find any alternative wordings.
Reasons. I realize that's a shitty and unsatisfying answer but that is the long-and-short of it. I'm not trying to be difficult, I promise- you can always count on me to make things easier for myself every time that I could. This is not one of those times.
Turn Susceptibility: X counts as undead for the purpose of effects that turn undead.
Are you planning on putting it up somewhere, or do you just prefer your home-made monsters to have tight wording?
That has a more active voice, yeah. Although i've got this knee-jerk reaction to "considered". Is there any other statblock that uses this word?
I guess I could always just drop "considered":
An X is an undead against effects that turn undead
still not very satisfying. I'm trying to avoid it sounding like Pathfinder wording.
I have a massive character art folder and to limit how much I save I've tasked myself with giving each image I save a personality and a descriptor. I saw this one and went to the "brown elf = half-drow" part of my myriad fetishes and wondered "If one of their parents is drow, wouldn't they try to defend them and who they are?"
Thus, Spunky Drow-Apologist.
How come we never got to see anyone that mastered conjuring abilities in any of the DnD movies? I'd like to have seen a party member that was a necromancer or liked to conjur up elementles or at least a ranger with some pets communicating with the creatures of the woods.
I would limit it to one hit die per casting since it is only a cantrip.
Otherwise I have to agree with >>45296071 .
>In truth the chain familiars are still superior to normal familiars. they are stronger, can deliver messages, can turn invisible and change shape.
1) Absolutely true. Anyone who argues that is braindead or trolling.
2) Just not good enough.
How do I CG Brass Dragonborn monk?
Roleplaying is a little weird, like I get Dragon clans and stuff like that but some things flavour wise are a bit odd eg. non-chromatics are/aren't evil aligned(?)
Seeing that monks primarily use Dex and Wis now, does Str in anyway help?
First 5e character, used to play 3rd in middle school and that's about it.
Pretty much this.
Sure, you have a better familiar than normal, that's the baseline requirement of the pact even being a thing.
Is it comparable to having access to a number of out of class cantrips completely of your choice, and then all of wizard ritual magic that keys off your CHA if needed, and having a normal familiar on top of that at no extra cost?
The shared spell resistance is one of the things that pushes it into viability.
You may as well two hand a quarterstaff for the d8 damage dice, but once you reach level 11 your punches do d8 anyway
But the average for a d4 is 2 and the average for a d8 is 4, its only ever 2 damage so chill out
In typical D&D fare, Chromatic dragons are evil, and Metallic are good. This restriction isn't always used, since a lot of people think it's lame to force all of x creature to be y alignment. Even in worlds that use this restriction, though, it doesn't apply to dragonborn. They are only distant relatives to dragons, so you can be whatever alignment you want.
Worth noting, since this is your first character. Monks are weak. They aren't unplayably weak, but it is noticable. A dragonborn doesn't give a monk anything it needs, so you would be even further behind the rest of your party, unless they were equally unoptimised.
In 5e as a monk you want to use a quarterstaff in two hands, at least until you get to lvl 5 and pretty much most creatures have nonmagical weapon resistance. All melee monk weapons use dex instead of str on attack and damage rolls, which is very hand and also just plain awesome imo.
You're really just restricting yourself needlessly, but I don't think it's a huge difference either way. Mostly it's just a smaller die at low levels and you wont be able to do slashing or piercing damage
Well, is it point buy, or rolled stats?
If it's rolled, than you can luck out and have good stats, anyway.
Point buy, you're fucked. You need your dex and wis, and the highest you can have it is 15, pumping them to 16 at level 4. Playing a race with Dex and Wis bonuses means starting with 1 higher to hit and damage, and 2 higher AC for the first 3 levels.
Welp, I'm fucked.
I'll see how it goes, should be fun either way.
That 14 wis hurts you a little more. It means you can only get one of them to 16 at level 4. Oh well, like you said, it should be fun either way. You won't be downright useless, and you have a few things that other people won't be able to do, but it will show that you're a little underpowered. Maybe your DM will be nice and throw you some magic items that can help balance it out.
Dwarf monk in my party has 15 dex. Shes doing okay and has been a contributing member thusfar. We're only level 3 at the moment.
So I wouldn't worry too much. In the beginning everything is super swing anyway because no one is rocking huge AC or to hit bonuses, so rolling high is really the best method of hitting monsters.
5e noob here. I'll be getting into a game that's going to be combat heavy and on the difficult side of things. What's the best class for combat in general? The obvious choice would be barbarian, but I'm not sure.
Combat in general? Every class is designed to be a part of combat. Combat is a big part of the game. The best in combat is the best class. The only answer people could really agree on for that is NOT Ranger or Monk. Probably not Barb, either, though.
Variant human is pretty good for monks if the game is using point buy. There are several feats with really good synergy, and you really don't want to delay getting Dex and Wisdom as high as you can.
If you're in a game that's going to be featuring a lot of difficult combat, I'd say that the most important thing is to coordinate with the other players when it comes to deciding your class.
A Great Weapon Master Barbarian does have some impressive damage, especially during rage, but with a two handed weapon you're going to have serious troubles when it comes to AC as a front line character.
>Variant humans are the best race in the game
I disagree. A single feat really doesn't outweigh the benefits of the other strong races. Variant Human is particularly good for certain builds, but they aren't the optimal choice for most classes. They're just very versatile.
Versatility != power.
Not him, but for any class, variant human is either tied for the best option, or slightly behind. Being able to choose where to put your points means you can start with a 16 in your 2 main stats no matter what class you play, and a feat on top of that. Versatility = Power in this case.
Assuming you have no light source, or spell/ability to create a light source, or spell/ability to see in the dark, or magic item that sheds light or lets you see in the dark... Yes.
The best classes for heavy combat are paladin, wizard, sorcerer, fighter, and cleric. Tbqh almost all classes are good at combat in some form or another but these classes have the best abilities for combat.
Actually a serious disadvantage for the races that don't have it when playing with DMs who don't just hand wave it.
Carrying a light source is a serious disadvantage for any situation requiring stealth.
Yes, if you need to go into a pitch black area stealthfully, and don't have the darkvision spell, or a friend who can cast it, or a magic item that can give you darkvision, or a class feature, you are better off being the OTHER race that is great for every class.
I already asked this yesterday but I couldn't see the replies since the thread was replaced so quickly, so I'll ask again.
I'm building a chainpact feylock, and the patron is an ancient hag, ie evil. Should I still go with a Pseudodragon or Sprite, or would an Imp or a Quasit be more fitting because of the alignment? Related question, does a warlock pick their own familiar or is it chosen by hte patron?
Also, I have no experience with familiars in 5e, but the quasit seems to be the most effective familiar by far (in combat anyway).
Not really the best, would say the second best for every class.
Half-Orc or Goliath are the best for Barb, but V. Human is right next.
Half-Elf is the best for Paladin, Bard and Warlock, but V. Human is right next.
Ghostwise Halfling or Wood elf are the best for Monk, but V. Human is right next.
They're the eternal 2nd in every class, they're good, but their best attribute is versatility to fit every character concept, and I don't think that's bad.
Said it better than I could've. That aside, Chain is STILL less "Holy FUCK nigga, you did WHAT"-tier than Blade.
I'm fairly certain the easiest hotfix would be some pseudo-smite whose damage type keys off the Patron's type usable CHA + 1 times per short rest, but given how much resists flames it'd probably not be worthwhile for Fiend.
If you want to dig into the flavor on dragons, or just Brass dragons specifically consider reading their segment in Draconomicon.
It's a 3.5 book, but the flavor still applies and it's a pretty good book.
Idk I am a human warlock in the underdark and I'm doing just dandy. My free feat was moderately armored so now I am a caster with a really high AC and since I an fiend patron I get temp hp when I knock creatures out. Half elf would be a solid option for warlock too but having 4 extra AC is grand for the wildly unpredictable and dangerous underdark.
Most classes do better with a feat. Every class does better with maxing their main abilities as fast as possible. One race can do both. In the scenario of "it is very important for it to be dark, and for you to see, and no one else can do this, and there is nothing to help you", well, shit, yeah, being a half-elf would of been nice, since you are probably the parties only stealth character. But you know what? Outside of those moments, you could probably use that feat.
I'm not even the guy who said variant human was the best race. I think it is tied with half-elf, because they get the same versatility, but with +2 cha, an extra skill, elvish, darkvision, and fey ancestry at the cost of that feat. These two races? OBJECTIVELY BEST IN THE GAME. It shouldn't need to be spelled out for people.
Mountain Dwarf is also pretty great, but only if you want to stack Str and Con, because you can have 2 18s by level 4.
Go kindly fuck yourself
Tiefling monk is an inherently bad idea. Both your stat bumps are to stats that easily qualify for dumps stats. And that's on one of the most heavily ability score dependent classes in the game.
We get it, you're a min-max supremacist.
>Tieflins don't fit
>Monks don't fit
Hey, guys, we have one of the wotc devs here, he must know alot about what fits or doesn't fit in the game because he's one of the creators, right?
just an observation. I wasn't responding to what you said so much as the conversation topic. Now I'm wishing I had made my wood elf a monk instead of a druid. With the stats I rolled I'd have had an 18 AC and an 18 Dex at level 1.
So I kinda rolled up a human monk with these stats and houserule says we all get a free feat at lvl3 (currently lvl2 preparing to level up).
I'd like to hear some suggestions.
I'm going to pick sun soul tradition.
So I had the idea of picking up magic initiate(wizard) and get sword burst as a cantrip.
Anyone know what other spells I could pick?
>"The 5e devs wrote Forgotten Realms"
>"These races aren't a retarded retcon, I swear!"
Dragonborn and Tieflings as core races are retarded in literally any setting that isn't Points of Light, and the only reason they fit in PoL is because PoL was so ill defined as to barely qualify as a setting at all.
They belong in the Monsters Manual with a big "ON GM APPROVAL ONLY" label stamped on them.
Dragonborn are so out of place that they were literally retconned as extra-dimensional.
I didn't mean "Fit in" as in "Fit in to society" I meant "Fit into the world"
Also, every class except like, Warlock and Sorcerer, fit in perfectly fine in the societies that are inclined towards them and adventuring is basically an established profession.
I play in plenty of settings and they don't fit into any of them.
They also don't fit in any of my homebrew because I generally don't write my worlds for the 12-16 year olds that WoTC included Dragonborn and Tieflings to appeal to.
>every class except like, Warlock and Sorcerer, fit in perfectly fine
Presumably, at some point, you are going to come to a settlement. You know what doesn't fit in? Tribal people. Normally not friendly animals. Fully armored people. People with large weapons. People with magic items. People with MAGIC. Anything that isn't a Dex based martial with no obviously special gear. So, a guy with leather armor, and a bow or a rapier.
Do you play in some kind of homebrewed low-magic setting?
Because what you're describing doesn't hold true in any published D&D setting ever.
If you wanna play in "Literally medieval Europe" then that's your affair.
In published material, everyone immediately recognises you as an adventurer. You go to places that are filled with NORMAL PEOPLE. There is a reason that NPCs don't all have class levels.
So what's the difference between
>That guy has big armor. OH! Adventurer!
>That guy has a dragon face. OH! Adventurer!
Or, better yet.
>A moon elf? In these parts? Must be an adventurer.
>A tiefling? Here
You get the picture.
Elves and Adventurer's Guilds fit organically into the setting.
Meanwhile Dragonborn not only had to be retconned into existence, but they're so bizarre that they literally had to use "They're visitors from another planet" as an excuse to have them at all.
Like I said, I'm not against having either of the races be there at all, but they shouldn't be a fucking core race because that implies some degree of commonality.
Just fucking put them in the DMG or the Monsters manual.
There a big fucking difference in the degree between "Oh he's carrying a big sword? He must be a career warrior"
"Oh he has scales and breathes lightning? He must be one of the dragon-men from space"
>with a big "ON GM APPROVAL ONLY" label stamped on them
This stamp is in the PHB (although not really big). It clearly states that there are four core races, and the other races should be taken up with the DM
I don't see such a stamp. Only the statement (both in Chapter 1 and 2) that Man, Elf, Dwarf and Halfling are way more common / have much higher populations than the other races.
Why would one need to make up some shit about space? Dragonborn are the result of dragons literally fucking around, and dragons are always fucking around. Among the countless other bizarre creatures in the world, a race of humanoid dragons in a game called Dungeons&DRAGONS is pretty mundane.
>Dragonborn are the result of dragons literally fucking around, and dragons are always fucking around. Among the countless other bizarre creatures in the world, a race of humanoid dragons in a game called Dungeons&DRAGONS is pretty mundane.
Are you entirely sure you understand how populations work?
For there to be an entire RACE of these things the dragons would need to literally make a point of breeding them and then breeding them with each other over and over to get the numbers up.
Just occasionally fucking around with some mortals would not result in a race, which is why Half-Dragons are distinct from Dragonborn and are in the fucking Monsters Manual where they belong.
Thanks for the heads up mang, bless you with good shekels and fortune.
>and are in the fucking Monsters Manual where they belong.
>Dragonborn are the result of dragons literally fucking around, and dragons are always fucking around.
Dragonborn are spawned from drops of Io's blood. dragon sorcerers are the result of dragon fuckery
>I don't see such a stamp. Only the statement (both in Chapter 1 and 2) that Man, Elf, Dwarf and Halfling are way more common / have much higher populations than the other races.
You are right, I was wrong. I was sure it said something like that in the PHB, but that's only in regard to Drow, not the other uncommon races. My bad.
Still, when we started our 5e campaign some time ago I made it clear that playing an uncommon race (except for half-elves), wouldn't be without consequences.
Tiefling could have just been here's some stats for people with devilish heritage. Dragonborn would be the same thing for people with draconic heritage. They didn't have to have the whole history of a race and this is what they are doing in the setting. They could have been just as developed as half-elves and half-orcs, culturally.
Currently DMing a FR game, by party request (slightgrimace). Need a hospice for the insane, run by some religious order. What god or goddess would that be in the default FR pantheon from the Sword Coast book?
>>now have to make my own adventure from scratch
No you don't.
There's modules you could run, even ones directly tied into Mines of Phandelver.
If you're not comfortable making your own shit yet, use those.