/5eg/ 5th Edition D&D General

Thread topic: you have a choice between a level 20 champion fighter mercenary, or a level 10 warlock mercenary.

From a purely min max perspective, how could you possibly justify taking the champion fighter over the warlock?

>>47183456
After defeating a Gelatinous Cube last session, I scooped some up and managed to bring it back what it was before just on a smaller scale, I keep it in a Chest it can't dissolve and named it Baby Clean. No clue what I'm going to do with it, was thinking of storing magical items in it

http://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/05/10/a-new-dungeonsdragons-adventure-storm-kings-thunder/

Just saw this on reddit. Sounds neat but I'll be a bit dissapointed if it doesn't get an Elemental Evil companion supplement or something similar.

>>47183508

champion has 8 attacks 15% crit and 21 ac and far more hp, seems good to me.

>>47183508
>10th level Warlock
lel, class is meh as fuck, I'd choose almost any other class even at 10th level, Champion it's.

>>47183508
Is this a ruse? the fighter of course, not only it's better at the same level, you also give him 10 more.

>>47183528
It also has more feats (you can even pick magic initiate and cast) and can reroll saves 3 times a day

>>47183508
Wasn't this a thread in the gaintip forum?

>>47183508
This is really dumb fighter wins no matter what, unless you mistyped and meant a lvl 20 warlock also

Which thread is for talking about the older editions of the game?

>>47183652
Other threads

If there isn't one then make it, should be fine considering no more quest cancer

What's the minimum character level you DMs start giving out +1 weapons/armor?

One of my players wants to be a ranger in COS and I'm considering buffing it just a tad because I find it slightly weak

Would ignoring hunter's mark concentration req and giving the animal companion max hp+4 times ranger level be fine?

Hunter seems good enough to me

File: 1462503984788.jpg (766KB, 1100x1779px) Image search: [Google]

766KB, 1100x1779px

>>47183795
1st. But the catch is that you have to EARN that artifact, nigga!

>>47183508
Warlock, easily. Damage is not the limiting factor for higher level gameplay IMO. Spell slots and utility are.

>>47183926
Fighter can be better in every skill, and by 20 would have magical gear to make up for lack of spells

>>47183926
hahahaahha, thinking a 10th level warlock can do anything better than a 20th level champion, if this were 3.5 you'd be right

>>47183964
10th level warlock barely has spells though, only 10 spells known and only 2 slots

So I've finally browbeaten my group into giving 5e a shot... With the caveat that they want to do the Pathfinder adventure path "Iron Gods". Is there a guide to converting Pathfinder adventures to 5e? Is it even worth trying?

>>47183926
Are you serious? The warlock has nothing in his measly 2 spell slots that can possibly stop the freight train that is a level 20 champion

Shit, lv10 warlock would have trouble taking on a lv10 champion to begin with

>>47183992
Just take the encounters and adjust the CR using the same monsters, then adjust the non-combat DCs, easy as can be

>>47183992
You're going to run into one big problem really fast: Iron Gods relies heavily on Barrier Peaks-style futuristic alien technology, and 5e just straight up doesn't have any equivalents yet. I'd wait on it. See if they'll compromise for something a little more traditional, like Runelords or Giantslayer.

>>47183992
If you translate monsters prepare for thousands of TPKs, 3.PF is more "epic" than 5e.

>>47183456
> Oddest pet
Tecocelotl are absolutely a thing in my setting, yes.

Guys, it has been a long time since I entered in 5eg and asked this question, but now that the dust has settled and more official material has been released, I was wondering, how do I RULES OF NATURE! in 5e?

>>47184028
The question wasn't who would win in a fight, it was who you would rather have as a mercenary.

>>47183990
That's six slots per day, as well as any invocations. That's six slots your wizard can devote to more stuff.

>>47184217
Play a monk in a setting with firearms. That missile-catching ability just got more impressive.

>>47184296
>that's six slots
>implying you're entitled to 2 rests per day
Kek

>>47184296
Man, give me the phone number of your GM I also want to have 2 short rest per day too

>>47184351
>what are lunch and dinner

>>47184351
>>47184387
I made short rests 15 minutes so my party pretty much takes short rests after every encounter

>>47184400
That's the same thing though? Don't you mean dinner and tea?

>>47184400
That's one short rest and the food immediately before a long rest.

>>47184222
I'd still get the champ, the only situation in which I wouldn't is if I was playing a champ myself, and even then, can you imagine the sheer force we would dish out? It would be like a freight train with 2 locomotives

>>47184419
>pretty much every encounter
Have you considered playing around with urgency? Putting on more time constraints so they can't take short rests or can only do one or two a day?

Are they going to release a new monster manual or something with actual content soon? I'm a DM with actual ability to DM so these lame ass fifty dollar adventures really aren't doing it for me.

>>47184493
From the looks of it no. Which really fucking sucks.

>>47184450
I really see no need for it, having a short rest per encounter has been working okay, and they haven't been in any dungeons where they couldn't easily have taken an hour

The only exception was at the temple of moving stones on POTA, they took too long between the fight with the bandits and the priest so I had him prepare (spider climbed to the ceiling, set up cover stones, readied an action to acid splash the first one to enter and prepared his getaway)

They are currently short resting inside the sacred stone monastery but I allowed that to happen because they already killed the boss and we're taking a break until august for one of the players to go home for summer

>>47184533

So 5e is dead then? That's a shame.

They actually learned to balance feats for once. They also could have made major and minor feats for additional customization.

They could have had ability score diversification by limiting it to +1 to two scores, instead of instituting that silly cap.

Proficiency was an actually good idea.

This editiOn could have been good. Makes me sad.

>>47184577
What? No, there is a major content book coming out soon (meaning sometime before next summer) that will either be a sort of PHB2 or SCAG-like thing for Eberron

They did a survey recently to see what people wanted for the "first major content expansion"

>>47184656
>For Eberron
Nice, I hope they improve Shifters, Warforgeds and release Mystics.

>>47184656

> scag for Eberron.

> book with actual genetic content that doesn't shill a published setting

Guess which one they'll pick? Hint: it's the one that doesn't require any actual effort to produce.

>>47184217
Probably a Fighter or Barb. What are the specific things you wanna do mechanically?

>>47184577
You're an idiot.

>>47184656
After the SCAG though I dont have much faith in them producing anything of quality or note. Like hell what has actually been used from the SCAG besides those cantrips?

>>47184773

Explain how, then.

> inb 4 "no cause you're too retarded to understand" or any of that shit, if you cannot defend your opinions you are not allowed to have them.

>>47184778

Nothing because it's basically a reprint of the Faerun campaign setting books from the past three editions.

>>47184685
What else would you want? Most everyting is covered by the PHB, DMG and SCAG, and I hope you don't believe the SCAG content is sword coast exclusive
All the things people want could definitely be fit into an EAG

File: dndclassbalance3.png (274KB, 2994x1477px) Image search: [Google]

274KB, 2994x1477px

>>47184577
It still has fundamental caster/martial imbalances, and relies on an archaic d20 mechanic instead of something more modern like narrative dice or the one roll system, or even fucking apocalypse world's move system.

I have hopes for 6e, since other innovators are going to start cutting into DnD's sales if this mediocrity continues, but 5e is a lost cause.

I wish I could get my players to stop playing it.

First time player here trying to get my RP down.
If I'm a cleric of illmater who got into it for the healing, how can I justify cutting down goblins like they're wheat?
Also when I let one go (DM gave me the opportunity to either coup de gra it or interrogate I chose the latter) did I bone my party out of XP?
Should I have tied it up, or what do non murder hobos do? Just kill it justifying it by saying it was picking off travelers?

>>47184762
>What are the specific things you wanna do mechanically?
CUHRAZY! things

Looks like this threads going to turn into shit.

File: 1462129123004.gif (328KB, 1000x773px) Image search: [Google]

328KB, 1000x773px

>>47184804

>>47184804

Well you are right about the faster imbalance. But moves from AW? No, DnD has a certain identity and if it loses hat to pander to "new" hipster shit it might as well not exist. I like Apocalypse World but using it for fantasy is a fuckng mistake, just look at Dungeon World.

5e could have been good but sadly it is too late now. The game is dead. If they can't get it right after five fucking editions then they are never going to.

>>47184778
I'm using the undead Warlock patron, one of my party members is rocking the battlerager, and the other is using that one monk with the DBZ ki blasts, we're all having hella fun. Not for you =/= not for anyone.

>>47184801
Given that the last chapter of the SCAG is literally "how to use this shit in other campaigns", I should _HOPE_ nobody thinks it's Frealms exclusive. (lost my shit at the suggestion for getting Battleragers into Dragonlance)

>>47184847

> Can't refute or argue against his points

> I'll pos a bait image instead because these threads should only be for circle jerking about how great 5e is.

>>47184847
He isn't all that wrong though, casters have more variety thanks to spells which essentially makes them be one step above everytime.

>>47184817

Are you seriously playing a pacifist in a fucking DnD campaign?

Just focus on buff spells.

>>47184892
I'm not going that far, just trying to have a character that is consistent.

>>47184857
I don't think we need to pander to hipster shit, but recognizing that a binary d20 roll to determine just success or failure is silly isn't pandering. You could accomplish what those games accomplish (information rich non binary outcomes) while using the d20. It's just the DnD designers don't, and IMO the game suffers for it.

>>47184892
It's a completely valid way to play, you only need a DM who isn't a complete retard.

How much damage would you have a cannon ball do?

>>47184976
depends on the canon and the ball.

I'd guess 5d6 bludgeoning.

Maybe an explosive component too depending on whose firing.

File: Screenshot_2016-05-10-20-08-29.png (4MB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1440x2560px

>>47184976

>>47184976
It's in the DMG: 8d10

>>47184996
Wait, +6 to hit? Why is a cannon more accurate than standing next to a guy and poking him with a pointy stick?

On the other hand, there is a chance of a Monk catching that and throwing it back.

>>47184964

DnD has had stuff like that, but honestly I prefer he binary outcomes and interpreting it on my own.

d20'is swingy as fuck but it's part of DnD

>>47184973

> if the DM doesn't fellate but completely non viable character build, he is a shit DM

> if my DM doesn't support me trying to play a mech in power armor in Call of Chtulu, he is a shit DM for not being more adaptable.

>>47185035

> what is dodging and or parrying

File: 2007_0607stallman0029.jpg (27KB, 593x445px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 593x445px

I'm going to introduce my BBEG at the next session, and I'm super worried that I'm going to fuck it up.

My backstory is basically:

>World where all the gods meet in a council every X years
>Characters find mysterious orb
>Things happen
>Characters learn that the gods' meeting is actually so they can talk to their own creators
>Characters also learn that the creators sometimes fail to show up, and that gods tend to die when that happens
>Realize that the mysterious orb can kill gods
>Get into the meeting, presumably with the plan of using it (maybe)

There's a twist, of course. I wrote out about how it should go—could somebody look it over for me? Is it too long? Does the BBEG present a credible threat? Is it 2edgy?

http://pastebin.com/yfywpdb0

>>47185059

False equivalency is false. You just need to be creative at bypassing encounters if you're a pacifist, but it's completely doable. In fact, I hope more DMs make combat so lethal that it's a good idea for anyone, not just pacifists, to search for alternative approaches.

>>47185038
as DM, I appreciate having rules and shit for "well you missed the guard with your arrows, but you hit a barrel behind him and now he's covered with oil.

Star Wars does it really well, and imo it makes the DM's job way easier, precisely because I don't have to constantly ask when to spice combat up and how: the Players have rules support to do so already.

>>47185113

> need to be able to bypass or talk your way out of literally every encounter.

What if you fight zombies ?

Or skeletons?

>>47185123

So what is stopping you from saying that?

The issue with non-binary outcomes as a rule is that they must be used every time. In AW rolls are very rare and only take place at story points. Ina DnD combat it will just bog things down. It sjoule be discussed in the core mechanic section but, sturcutring it like AW? No. The two philosophies of gaming are at odds in terms of amount of rolling.

>>47185127
Bypassing doesn't necessary mean talking. Distractions, sneaking, magic, simply running past... And you don't have to be a pacifist towards mindless creatures that are already dead.

>>47185153
There's nothing stopping me from saying it, but leaving everything like that up to DM fiat both makes it burdensome for me, and annoying for players. It turns the game into a roleplaying hybridized with begging for bonuses from the DM and begging to avoid a situational malus from the DM.

Having rules support makes it more satisfying for the players when it happens (instead of just me giving them a bone), and less arbitrary when they get screwed by disadvantage. It's better all around.

And you should give FFG's star wars a try. It's a pretty fast system with stuff I've been talking about. Quite fun.

>>47185035
>On the other hand, there is a chance of a Monk catching that and throwing it back.
There's a statistical chance, sure, but in practice it isn't going to happen

>>47185207
And if he does by some miracle manage to catch it, he couldn't throw it back and do 8d10 with it. At best 1d4.

>>47185191

Tell me more about ffg .

I agree with you about he GM fist thing, maybe there a middle ground. As long as you don't kludge on mechsnics that don't fit together like Torchbearer and Dungeon World. Altering DnD too much fucks with its identity. But other than that, if it is done by competing devs, it could be improved.

>>47185035
>8d10 damage
>Deflect Missiles: 1d10 + Dex + Monk level

At the most a monk will deflect 35 ranged damage. Average for a cannon ball is 44. Unless they roll really badly for damage, in which case you can reenact Kung Fu Panda.

>>47185229
FFG uses a narrative dice system, with different symbols.

You have success paired with failure
Advantage paired with Disadvantage
Triumph paired with Despair.

Opposites cancel each other out, except for Triumph and Despair. Your dice pool is determined by your skills and abilities, the difficulty of the task, and any circumstances that make it easier or harder.

If you have one success left over after everything is canceled out, you succeed. Additional successes can represent how much you succeed by. Failure is always binary: you can never fail more by having more failures left over in the pool.

If you have any advantage or disadvantage left over at the end of the roll, they give you circumstantial bonuses. Additionally, some weapons or skills let you convert advantage into defined bonuses (such as crits). You can fail with advantage, or succeed with disadvantage, and vice versa. For instance, you might successfully hack the computer and open the door, but also trigger a silent alarm that results in more guards contesting you later. Etc.

Triumph and Despair are super advantage and disadvantage, respectively.

Players generally get to decide what to do with their advantages (and the book has suggestions for each skill on what is appropriate), and the DM gets to decide what to do with disadvantages.

Once your players get used to the dice, it's a ton of fun.

>>47184892
I played a sort of pacifist healer cleric once. I had no qualms with killing monsters and shit, but I'd protest if we killed people instead of capturing them. Just tell your martials to declare non-lethal damage whenever they got close to killing anyone or convince your DM to give enemies death saving throws and then stabilize them after the fight.

>>47185289
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHpuPXKOwUI

>>47185329

That sounds pretty cool. Does it slow down combat much,corn does combat have very few rolls compared to DnD?

>>47183795
When I was running Lost Mine of Phandelver my party skipped the goblin trail, and I realized it would have been 100% possible for them to get a +1 Longsword at level 1. Although, that would either require some great luck, or a player knowing where it was located already and rushing to that location.

>>47185379
>Literally maxing the d10 and enemies rolling poorly constantly
AKA stuff that will never happen

>>47185418
How would they have dealt with the nothic though? Also, the people in Phandalin would have told the party that Gundren never arrived, prompting them to backtrack and go look for him.

>>47185383
Combat is a bit more abstracted than DnD, and it generally runs fast. It's designed I think to be a bit more dramatic.

Whats a good name for a city gang that currently only consists of 3 wood elves?

We're playing in a city game and our party is literally a gang that's just starting up, currently its just us but we're starting to make a name for ourselves.

We don't want to exactly be "the elf gang", at least overtly, if we end up being a gang that just happens to be sometimes referred to as "that elf gang" so be it, but its not what we're aiming for.

Gimmicks are also welcome, we just need some way to make our gang semi memorable.

File: 1437568188207.jpg (966KB, 1130x1464px) Image search: [Google]

966KB, 1130x1464px

>>47185469
The Three Faggots.

File: images.png (8KB, 284x177px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 284x177px

>>47184879
>>47184882
It's more like pic related, I disagree and have no intention of getting pulled into that discussion, so I just post a meme, hide the post and move on

Is 5e really that bad? I haven't played any other system, and I don't see why I would need too. 5e was easy to get into, and seems alright on the surface. We haven't had any problem aside from when we had someone play a wizard and they were pretty strong, but it was easy to counter and balance. Are people complaining because they like to whine? Or is there really something? I don't have any experience with a different system, so no way to compare 5e's rules and play to something else.

>>47185652

> I haven't played any other system

That's why. Case closed.

>>47185652
It isn't bad. People are just asshat whiners. As long as you and your group is having fun with it, there's no reason to change anything about it.

>>47185695
Do you have the attention span of a vaccinated goldfish?

>>47185652
5e isn't bad, it's just that other systems do other things (like dice pools). Some people who like these other things have been convinced that these other things are inherently better than the things that DnD does. I would definitely recommend trying out other systems if for no other reason than to broaden your horizons and have fun.

>>47185708

The rest of his post does nothing except unintentionally highlight a flaw of 5e; caster supremacy. Sure it's not as bad as 3.5 but that's like saying the Rwandan gencoide is not as bad as the Holocaust..

>>47185715

Literally nothing in this post contains an argument.

> other systems so othter things

How the fuck does that imply 5e is good?

>>47185652
Don't listen to the whiners, 5e is the best edition of D&D so far and the best game at what it intends to do: get a group together to go through some dungeons and slay some dragons

There is a lot of shitposting and complaining in these threads about how people feel other game systems are better because 5e is missing this or that thing they like and they will never get, but they don't realize they can just stop shitposting in this thread and play what they like.
5e also actively encourages homebrewing in much the same way some videogame publishers encourage modding, and a lot of people here believe that license to homebrew equals license to force people to like what they don't like or hate what they hate.

A lot of people posting here are just "badwrongfun" spergs and memesters.

I do encourage you to try other systems, but 5e is my and my group's favorite, and ultimately the main topic of this thread, however much people whine about it. Just block it out and focus on conversation that interests you.

>>47185765
There is no argument, nobody is trying to say 5e is better than whatever your system of choice is, you are the one trying to start the equivalent of console wars, just leave or stop shitposting

>>47185791

You offer no concrete reasons why 5e is best edition.

Also, there are lots of fantasy games out here that do the same thing as DnD except better than DnD itself.

The devs live in a fuckin time capsule I swear. They finally discovered background mechanics and bounded accuracy..... 10 years after the rest of the RPG community at large. At his rate we will have caster balance by tenth edition. Oh wait, fourth had it, and fourth got dumped in the shitter because other stuff about it sucked and the devs are reactionary fucks who throw the baby out with the bathwater

>>47185765
Literally nothing in this post contains an argument.

> I shitpost in generals for systems I hate

How the fuck does that imply 5e is bad?

>>47185700
Except you could have more fun with a better system

>>47185841

> 5e isn't bad

That is an assertion. If you can't back it up then you are false. Same with the other guy who said DnD 5e is the best edition so far. Support your claims or get the fuck out.

>>47185469
The Knife Ears

>>47185889
The onus would be on the person claiming that d&d is bad.

Why do you feel the need to come to the 5e general and shitpost?

>>47185865

You made he assertion, the burden of proof is on you.

5e is based on outdated mechanics, alignments that do not represent realistic human motivations, a stat increase system that literally works against its own intention, then institutes a hard cap to cover up its own shortcomings. You are still punished for playing a martial, and character customization is basically picking one of five combat styles as a fighter.

There is more but I'll leave it there for now as that should be plenty in the plate for your tiny brain to do that.

> inb4 you explain away these flaws as "that's the point of DnD!!!"

>>47185929
See
>>47185942

>>47185942
None of the points you list are objectively bad.

File: Screenshot_2016-05-02-15-48-06-1.png (2MB, 1440x1849px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1440x1849px

I have a question guys, how do you get the "cloudy" look at the edge of pictures I usually see on homebrew? I want to apply it to this on naturalcrit but have no clue how to do it, is it html script or some sort of photoshop work?

>>47185990
None of the points you can list are objectively good.

>>47185990

> Being punished for playing a martial is not objectively bad

>>47185999
Photoshop

>>47183828
Plz respond

>>47185942
> You
> You
> You

Because only one person could possibly disagree with you.

>>47185999

You mean the cloudy look that looks like utter shit? Your page looks fine as is.

>>47186018

Ignoring the part where you aren't punished for playing a martial, yes. Playing a mundane character in a magical world is a big disadvantage.

>>47183785
Well then
>>47185375
Would you use a Pseudoelemental in one of your games?

>>47186032

> "you" cannot be plural

If you are going to argue pointless semantics to avoid facing the truth that 5e is a mediocre game at best, please tell me so both of us don't waste time.

>>47186051

Martials in 5e are still underpowered as shit.

Also, this is a game. No one wants to play mundane characters. By your logic, 3.5 is good.

File: huckster roguish archetype v0-2.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>47186023
Ah, thanks m8, now to figure out how to work photoshop

Have my favorite homebrew

>>47185652
I liked it a lot more than 4th edition.

5e isn't bad, isn't great either is just ok. Better in almost any aspect than 3.5 and that's what made me try it.

>>47186068
> N-nuh-uh! That's not what I meant!
> M-must b-b-be hard being so s-stupid!

I enjoy this system, and others. I don't pick fights with strangers on the internet for the purpose of reinflating the tattered scraps of what you somehow call an ego.

Go play something you enjoy. Don't shit in the pool because you don't enjoy swimming.

>>47186033
You think? I feel like it's a bit plain

>>47183828
Removing concentration on Hunter's Mark doesn't really fix anything for them, but definitely give the animal companion more HP. I tend to go for 6 per ranger level, a solid 50% increase.

If Hunter's Mark is your focus on fixing it, make it free to cast, maybe twice per short rest or something, or Wisdom times per long rest.

I'm trying to design a megadungeon set in/around/under a mountain. Setting is FR, the mountain is gonna be somewhere up in the Spine of the World.

I'm fairly new to FR as a setting, what sorts of things might be living up there? Any cool ideas as to what I can put down there?

>>47185469
Mowgli of the Concrete Jungle

File: 5e monster list arctic.png (196KB, 362x392px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 362x392px

>>47186162
DMG Appendix B has lists of monsters by environment. There's also one for mountains.

>>47186054
That sounds super complicated to be honest, like I feel if I were to actually get into it and run a campign with that stuff my players wouldn't be able to keep up. As it is they have trouble keeping up with minor investigations to the point that I had to make an NPC that does most of the legwork and just points them at stuff

>>47186081
Martials aren't underpowered

Some, like fighters, or Paladins, are great in combat, maybe better than most casters. The balance, in 5e at least, is only out of combat

>>47186162
I mean, you're working with some pretty varied terrain there: Alpine terrain with the option for underdark and maybe some plane of fire stuff, if it's a volcanic mountain.

Can you be more specific, or is in/around/under mountain as far as you've gotten?

>>47186081
They aren't underpowered. And players who don't want to play mundane can roll a caster, or multiclass. Why is this an issue?

>>47186144
I'll also be implementing some other things for the companion, like barding and death saves (which are both already in the books but looks like people don't use them)

Though i have a gut feeling he will end up going hunter, he said his character is gonna be an indiana jones type archaeologist guy

Battlemaster fighter
fighting style: archery
maneuver: precision attack
feats: crossbow expert, sharpshooter
weapons: heavy crossbow, hand crossbow
20 dexterity

>declare sharpshooter, fire heavy crossbow
>hit: 1d10+15
>miss: roll precision attack superiority die, see above if hit
>declare sharpshooter, fire heavy crossbow
>hit: 1d10+15
>miss: roll precision attack superiority die, see above if hit
>declare sharpshooter, fire heavy crossbow
>hit: 1d10+15
>miss: roll precision attack superiority die, see above if hit
>drop heavy crossbow
>draw hand crossbow
>declare sharpshooter, fire hand crossbow
>hit: 1d6+15
>miss: roll precision attack superiority die, see above if hit
>declare sharpshooter, fire hand crossbow
>hit: 1d6+15
>miss: roll precision attack superiority die, see above if hit

total damage
3d10+2d6+75

minimum total damage
80

mean total damage
100

maximum total damage
117

Viable?
Obviously this involves weapon dropping/drawing so it doesn't sustain itself every turn.

2nd turn:
>drop hand crossbow
>pick up heavy crossbow
>declare sharpshooter, fire heavy crossbow 4x, apply precision attack when necessary: 4d10+60
total damage 2nd turn: 4d10+60 (mean 84)

3rd turn:
>declare sharpshooter, fire heavy crossbow 3x, apply precision strike when necessary: 3d10+45
>pick up hand crossbow
>declare sharpshooter, fire handcrossbow 2x, apply precision strike when necessary: 2d6+30
total damage 3rd turn: 3d10+2d6+75 (mean 100)

even turn number, repeat turn 2
odd turn number, repeat turn 3

>>47183608
So was the bladelock best archer bait

>>47186184
Sweet, thanks.

>>47186206
Well I've picked a mountain, given it a name, and decided that there are a bunch of Dwarves from Mirabar up there trying to set up a mine. I'm thinking that there used to be a mining operation there that was abandoned a long time ago, and that there was some reason for that.

I'm just not sure what that reason should be.

>>47186375
that one was true though. I mean, I guess it could still be bait, but imo doesn't qualify.

>>47186349
What level is this supposed to be at?

>>47186501
sorry, forgot to include that. That's a level 20 (fighter's get their third extra attack at level 20)

>>47183515
Use it as a portable toilet.

And store your magical goods in it. Who is going to finger-fuck your turds to get that magic ring?

>>47183526
>Reddit

>>47183795
For a +1 weapon, I'd say level 7 at the very earliest. For a +1 armor, I'd say level 8 at the very earliest.

But I can't stand 3.5 / Pathfinder's "everyone is superheroes" style, so you capeshit faggots might disagree.

>>47183992
>converting Pathfinder to 5e

just get a new group, jesus christ

>>47186224

It's an issue because there is no good reason to play a martial

>>47186695
Except a lot of things.

File: i don't even think you tried at all.jpg (28KB, 550x550px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 550x550px

>>47184804
/tg/ really does have the weakest bait of all the boards

>>47186678

Some of us give a shit about our friends dumb nut. Not everyone subsists off of roll20 and playing with random strangers from the FLGS "game wanted " cork board

>>47186704

Like what things? You're just wasting time being evasive anon. There was no reason to play a martial in 3.x and no reason to play one in fifth edition. The problem is less severe but it's still a problem.

>>47186532
It's pretty great as far as number of shots and damage goes, but seems a bit boring

I dunno, I feel that if I picked a battlemaster I would be using manouvers for a lot more stuff than just getting extra DPR

If that's all you're looking for though, it's good, if a bit gamey

>>47186349
Minimum damage is 0

File: 11206089.jpg (10KB, 300x323px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 300x323px

>>47185035
>Why is a cannon more accurate than standing next to a guy and poking him with a pointy stick?

>>47186737

Like wanting to play a martial.

>>47186710

> I can't refute it so I'll call it bait

DnD fags, ladies and gentlemen! Can't handle their terribly balanced system being called out for its flaws, while also shutting on the only edition of their schizophrenic game that actually happened to be balanced while vacillating from one play style to another.

>>47186639
>For a +1 weapon, I'd say level 7 at the very earliest
In all precon campaigns you get it around 2nd level

>>47186760

That's like chopping your own leg off because you want to be a pirate. It's fuckng stupid. Playing a martial leaves you neutered and useless next to a wizard who can do everything you can do, except better, while doing loads of hints you can't do.

File: fire.gif (2MB, 300x229px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 300x229px

>>47185084
Does the lack of replies mean that it's really bad?

>>47186788
>That's like chopping your own leg off because you want to be a pirate.
No it's not.

>>47186805
I tried to read it, but it's both too long and poorly-written. It comes across as bad acting dialogue transcribed to text. Sitting around your RPG table, something like, "Be as dramatic as you want!" can work if the enemy is a massive ham, but I wasn't impressed by what I read.

>>47186822
Just stop responding to the shitposter already

Must we seriously have this martial vs caster discussion every fucking thread? Let people play what they want! Playing as casters is fun! Playing as martials is fun! So can you people just fuck off?

>>47186853
So tone down the ham factor?

I think I can do that. Probably. Hopefully.

>>47186805
>>47185084
>my BBEG
>my backstory is
>>world where blah blah blah
>>orb
>>orb is kill gods

>THERE'S A TWIST

>so... what do you think of my bbeg...?

Wat the fuk am i reading

>>47186822

>a cleric has martial weapon and heavy armor proficiency
>a cleric has spells
>a cleric can fight hand to hand or with ranged weapons
>a cleric can implicitly have the role of a fighter without being a fighter
>picking fighter is not reducing your combat and out of combat effectiveness

it's exactly like cutting your leg off. you are using the appearance of a pirate to be a pirate. the fighter class and lack of spells is the only appearance of a fighter in 3.of. A pirate doesn't need a peg leg, and someone who fights doesn't need to not have spells. It is exactly the same thing.

File: (you).jpg (17KB, 500x371px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 500x371px

>>47186770

>>47186782
>5e
>+1 weapons at 2nd level

Yeah, no. Go back to Pathfinder.

>>47186900
The more people rant about the state of martials in 5e (basically so boring my players want to kill their in game characters after 2 sessions of trying out the class), the more likely it is wizards will release a good supplement for martials.

>>47186887
But I enjoy it.

>>47186905
A failed attempt at summing up a complex backstory in a brief blurb.

I'm going to rewrite what I did and try to think of a less terrible summary, I guess. It's quite obvious that what I have now isn't going to cut it.

>>47186738
My favourite battlemaster trick is to dump all your superiority dice into the pushback attack. Especially funny if you can somehow get the enemy into the air and get underneath them so they take a bunch of fall damage.

>>47186904
If your players like ham, go for it.

I have no idea what your delivery style is. I read all of your wall-of-text in an obnoxious lisp because I assume you're a spindly, milquetoast, low self-esteem shut-in because you're asking for advice from 4chan but if you're a good actor, well... a good actor can turn even a shitty script into something passable.

>>47186822

It's purposely gimping yourself because you want to plAy a fighter but the system punishes you for playing one.

>>47186906

If we ignore all the parts where a fighter is better than a cleric, the point remains that wanting to play a martial is not like wanting to cut off your leg to play a pirate.

It would be more like cutting off your leg to play a peg-legged pirate. Or cutting off your balls to play an eunuch. You can play an eunuch who has balls, but then he wouldn't be an eunuch.

>>47186906
>>47186788

>fighter is useless! casters can do anything better than a fighter!
See >>47186349 ; a fighter can alternate between mean 100 damage and mean 84 damage per turn

I agree with you though; the fighter who literally just stands up to 400 feet away from the fight and fires bolts literally every turn is as boring as it gets. casters get to combine spells and martial techniques to form unique and varied combat strategies.

>>47186945
>the squeaky wheel gets the grease

>this is what millennials actually believe

>>47186945
>(basically so boring my players want to kill their in game characters after 2 sessions of trying out the class)
This has not been the case for myself or for the other martial players in my 5e groups. Sorry to hear you feel that way.

>>47186945
>it's not fun unless I have a bunch of fancy toys.
Why not focus on making a *character* that's fun to play instead of a spreadsheet that's fun to look at?

>>47186951
I can't even tell who the BBEG is supposed to be based on your greentext. Am I missing something or did you make a mistake and forget a line or two in there?

>>47187026
I could ask wizards virtually the same question:

Why not focus on making character classes that can't be contained merely by a DPS spreadsheet.

>Be arcane cleric
>Use BB or GFM
>Deal 2d6+15+3d8+5+d8
>Average 45
I mean, I not as good as a fighter, but I outdamage monks and rogues!...and maybe some barbarians.

File: Demongnomes Manual of Monsters.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Thought someone might like this. Bunch of monsters like phaerimm, allips, that sort of thing.

>>47186957
You can do this already, nothing in the rules says "away from you" means "horizontally"

In other words, if you have the crossbow expert feat at level 3 you can rush in, uppercut a guy 15 feet, shoot him with the crossbow for another 15 and let him drop for 3d6 damage

>>47187037
BBEG introduces himself in the linked blurb. The players have no idea who is he going in, so I figured would put readers in the same position.

>>47186979
I'm asking for advice from 4chan because all the people I normally go to for writing advice are my players.

I hesitate to call myself a good actor, but I'm definitely not timid when it comes to delivery. I think I can pull off a giant ham if I run through the lines once or twice.

My main concern is tone. It's supposed to have somewhat of a creepy edge to it, which I think it currently lacks. I'm not sure of how to fix it, unfortunately.

>>47187123
Until your DM shuts you down for not being realistic, while letting the wizard get away with murder.

>>47187123
>uppercut a guy 15 feet
How
>shoot him with the crossbow for another 15
Falls are instantaneus you can't keep firing at him, you have to wait till he falls, this is not, sadly, DMC

>>47187123
Eh, a lot of DMs would rule against using the pushback to knock someone vertically up, I think.

Don't tell me you faggots are still going on with the "martials suck" troll shit.

>>47187069
>outdamaging rogues, paladins and barbarians

Now that's a good joke anon

>>47187157
You should go back to preschool, seems you can't read.

>>47187146
>how
up·per·cut
ˈəpərˌkət
noun
1.
a punch delivered with an upward motion and the arm bent.
verb
1.
hit with an uppercut.

>falls are instantaneous
Says where?

>>47187149
I'm the DM for my group and I wouldn't

>>47187005
Squaky wheel gets the kick!

>>47187157
>paladins
Wut? who said paladins
As for barbarias, the average barb deals 2d6+30+12, average of 54, so yes, you can outdamage SOME barbarians

>>47187174
You don't outdamage monks either
Does trying to insult people for minor mistakes make you feel better somehow?

>>47187192
>Says where?
PHB

>>47187222
>4d10+20
>Average 41
>"You don't outdamage monks"
Ok, I should go back to school, now 41 is more than 45, good to know.

>>47187228
Sorry, I don't mean to be recalcitrant, but where in the PHB does it say that if you are thrown in the air you fall before any further actions can be taken by the one who threw you?

>>47187026
You do relize their is an actual game in this right? There is more to a RPG than just waxing poetic and while one can enjoy a character they can also be disappointed by what that character can actually do when considering the system of the game.

>>47187212
No barb is going to go TWF or SnB, so I don't think you can outdamage barbs.

>>47187212
Barbs crit harder.

>>47187069
>2d6+15+3d8+5+d8
I don't follow how you're calculating this? 3d8 from the cantrip's damage, 5 from Strength, 5 from Wis and 1d8 from the weapon would be 4d8+10, average 28.

>>47186996

A fighter is no better than a cleric. Same to hit, and the hit die difference is easily closed by magic.

>>47187003

> damage
> damage
>damage

Literally the only thing the fighter can do, and the wizard STILL does it better

>>47187255
I think it's a shame barbs don't work with TWF. Raging dual wielding maniac is a common trope, and the mechanics should support that.

>>47187302

> expecting the 5e rules to give Martials anything good

>>47187233
So while you're using a cantrip to attack (and adding a bunch of dice that make no sense) the monk, regardless of subtype is just flurrying? Talk about moving goalposts famalam

>>47187273
I misremembered arcane cleric having martial weapons, also I didn't add Wis twice (one from GFB and one from arcane cleric feature)

Tempest with magic initiate should work better I think

2d6 (weapon)+10 (GWM)+5 (Stat)+3d8(GFB)+5(Stat)+2d8(divine strike)

total 49.5

>>47187283
Guess the 3 extra attacks and 2 additional ASI are useless then.

>>47187408

Because magic can still beat them. And a fighter can do nothing b combat while a cleric can literally overtake the fighters role.

>>47187283
Action Surge, Fighting Style, Superiority Dice and Manoeuvres, extra ASIs. These are all very relevant.

>>47187212
A level 20 Barbarian using a greataxe (IIRC Brutal Crit and lack of fighting style pushes that ahead of greatsword) is making two swings of 1d12 + 10 (GWM) + 7 (strength) + 4 (rage) which is an average of 55 before taking into account crits (adding an extra 3d12 damage to ~10% of your attacks made and getting an extra attack everytime you crit is pretty huge)

>>47187302
It is viable at lower levels, and would be viable later on if there was a feat that let you pick up fighting styles

A totem barb with 2 battleaxes could do some serious damage, though I guess it wouldn't be as great as twf
3d8+15+3×rage

Vs

2d12+35+2×rage with the possibility of an extra 2d12+15+rage on a crit

Maybe they should come up with some sort of "battle trance" guy ala viking mad axeman that gets to flurry when using twf?

4d8+20+4×rage is still rather meh

Gotta think about this

>>47187438
>and getting an extra attack everytime you crit is pretty huge
He didn't use the possible extra attack from GWM either.

>>47187433

How?

>>47187499
That's the extra attack, gwm extras trigger off crits and you only have one bonus action per turn

>>47187438

Not really when the wizard can just turn invisible and rain fireballs on you til you die

>>47187507

Spells can overcome fighters because of overpowered spells like fly, fireball, and invisibility.

>>47187531

Or when the martial can just backstab the wizard before he has a chance to react.

>>47186930
You're telling WotC to go back to Pathfinder? Because they make the campaigns.

Maybe you're the one with the wrong idea of the system.

>>47187541
Ranged weapons are a thing, dear.

>>47187543

Except he can't because the wizard can detect him first.

Casters are objectively better because they can do everything and Martials can do one thing. 4e fixed this problem but Wizards abandoned it for a watered down ADND with feats.

>>47187404
How do you have 20 Int, 20 Strength, GWM and Magic Initiate? You planning on having any Wis and Con? With Point Buy and Human you could start with 16 Str / 8 Dex / 12 Con / 16 Int / 12 Wis / 8 Cha but man, that sounds like a dumb one-trick pony just to maximise cantrip damage.

Also, GFB doesn't work that way. You deal [melee attack] +3d8 to your primary target and spellcasting ability modifier + 3d8 to the secondary target.

>>47187555

except a wizard has far better ranged weapons. Called spells. And you can't shoot at something you can't see.

>>47187530
There's some miscomunication here...he only counted one attack (because he can only make one as action) but if he crits or kills someone with his 49.5 damage he gets another attack (that deals less because it doesn't get GFB shenanigans, 2d6+2d8+15 only)

Normally the barb makes two attacks like you said, averaging in 55 (more if he crits) and gets a 3rd attack if he crits of fells an enemy.

What I meant is that the first anon didn't even took into account the 2nd possible attack from the cleric (if he crits of fells an enemy).

>>47187569

He's trying to pretend Martials are viable in 5e, of course he's giving himself maxed out stats, it's the only hope he has.

>>47187586
>He's trying to pretend Martials are viable in 5e
He's doing the opposite; he's claiming Martials are terrible by coming up with a minmaxed caster build to try and compete with martial damage.

>>47187561

Is this a 'I expected that all along and teleport behind u' fight? Becaude you're making it seem like one.

>>47187576

Sure you can. You ready an action until he starts casting, then you shoot where the sound/magical lights are coming from.

>>47187569
Depending on what you seek you don't need high Wis, is the magic of 5e.

As for GFB, what did I do wrong? Ah, ok, I understand, no Int for the primary damage, well, better for me, I don't need to optimize Int then

2d6 (weapon) + 10 (great weapon master) + 5 (str) +3d8 (GFB) + 2d8 (divine strike)

>>47187671
Or even better. Ask your wizard friend to make enemy wizard visible. Because a party is supposed to cooperate.

>>47187438
The Cleric against many enemies is going to fell more enemies than the Barb, because he's dealing in one attack as much as the barb in two while also dealing 3d8+Int to secondary target

Cleric loses the secondary damage against solitary enemies though

>>47187671
Or throw a flask of alchemist's fire at them

Just got my PHB with rest arriving on Friday(thanks Amazon shipping to backwoods). It's looking nice, as was expected from PDFs.
But one thing I noticed was that paper on pages is really thin, especially compared to 3.5 books. I never got ones for 4E, did they also have this, or is this change for current edition?

So, I was wondering; with the new Traditions aspect of the 5e Wizard, could some of the Archetypes from Pathfinder be ported over? I'd really like to try and make the 6 Elementalists (Earth, Air, Water, Fire, Metal, Wood) into Traditions for the game, if possible... would anyone be willing to brainstorm how they might convert?

>>47187671

Except you can't do that without a huge penalty past even what disadvatnage does. Hence why advantage and disadvatnage are shut; they can't handle larger bonuses and penalties.

DnD 5 is shit, QED

>>47187721
>>47187696

That works too. Also, he seems to be ignoring that invis and fly are both concentration spells, so it's one or the other.

File: 1255074428682.png (5KB, 90x128px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 90x128px

So I may be joining a 5e campaign. I've mostly played Pathfinder, but also have some experience with 4e. What are some crazy/silly yet functional character concepts I could go with?

>>47187831
Why are people that come in from PF obsessed with gimmick builds? Just play something normal and work on your character development.

>>47187831
>What are some crazy/silly yet functional character concepts I could go with?
Almost none, 5e is very simple.

>>47187797

Casting is commonly depicted as making all sorts of magical lights fly around the caster, his hands in particular. That coupled with clearly uttered magical words make it a very possible. Unless you're a sorc with still spell I guess.

>>47187844
I dunno man, that's just been me since I've started. Everything else seems...kinda mundane, I guess? Maybe? I don't know. Maybe I just can't come up with a decent character unless they have some interesting quirk or what have you to them. Sorry.

>>47187855
I'm starting to realize that.

>>47184804
Too many people say skill checks like it's one thing. There are six ability scores eightteen different skills and a number of possible tools to come into play.

Meanwhile Wizards don't learn all the spells, they learn 44 spells for free, and can memorize up to 25 of them. And a lot of them only do what skills can already do or only interact with combat. If they don't, you're going to suck when it comes down to combat. Any spells beyond that were given by the DM.

Then doing more things, more successfully, in the same amount of time is actually important. Any elf can swing a sword, but there's a clear difference in effect when the fighter does it.

Finally, classes don't have to do the same kinds of things to have the same amount of power.

>>47184964
The DMG has some advice about how to handle checks. It's only binary because that's how you want it.

>>47185191
You can codify when it happens, like hitting the cover, but for the actual effect it's going to be DM fiat every time. You can't make a random event table for everything.

>>47185221
It would count as a monk weapon, so 1d10.

>>47185329
Sounds fun, but you hve to admit that's more swingy than the d20. Yeah, dramatic.

>>47185942
All I see is bare assertions.

>>47186349
Can't you just take your bonus action after the first attack for turn 2, then switch, since you can take your bonus action whenever it's legal. Like shoving before attacking with shield master.

>>47186429
It was bait because it left out some facts from the original post, and wasn't true.

>>47186737
> Fighters are worthless. Prove me wrong.
No you.

>>47186788
>a wizard who can do everything you can do, except better, while doing loads of hints you can't do.
Doesn't happen. People have tried, and been shown for fools. You're welcome to try to prove it.

>>47186906
The last cleric that tried to take the fighter's job found he did less damage, had less defense, and provided less healing than his competition.

>>47187797
> QED
I wasn't aware explosives-grade spergery qualified as demonstration.

You've demonstrated nothing beyond what is, at best, a tangential grasp of the rules. Nothing you've called proof has been, in my experience, a fun-breaking issue in-situ.

I'm sorry you don't enjoy 5e. I'm not sorry that you're incapable of allowing others to enjoy what you don't.

>>47187887
>The last cleric that tried to take the fighter's job found he did less damage, had less defense, and provided less healing than his competition.
>Less defense
How? the both have access to the same armors, maybe only 1 point less due defense style, but that's not much
>Less healing
The fuck? how can fighters do more healing that clerics? or healing at all

File: rock_band.png (19KB, 449x236px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 449x236px

>>47184804

>>47187944
Less damage or defence than a fighter, and less healing than a regular Cleric is I think what he's saying.

>>47187944
>how can fighters do more healing that clerics
A Cleric that attempts to supplant a fighter is less effective at clericky things.

> how do i subtext?

>>47187831
Variant human rogue with healer feat and soldier: healer background. Also trade vehicle proficiency for herbalism kit proficiency so you can brew your own healing potions at half cost.

The balance problems aren't as obvious as in 3.5 and most of the time they don't even appear

>>47187831
Make a loli ninja.

>>47187944
> Deliberately being a retard
> Calls it "proving a point"
Never change, anon.

>>47187976
And yet a fighter can't even try to be clericky at all.

>>47187881
I have the same problem. For me the reason I like having a quirk as its potentially and probably the only interesting your character will have going for them. Mostly due to 98% GM's being shit at their job

>>47187999
>Calls it "proving a point"
I reread that post 10 times, still can't find where he wrote "proving a point", so here's my question, the fuck are you talking about?

>>47187999
> Deliberately putting words in others mouth
I won't?

>>47188012
> What is magic initiate
> What is healer
> What is enjoying being a fighter
Do you really, truly believe players aren't happy if they can't do everything themselves?

Is there a way as a monk to deal as much damage as any other class (srly, one would suffice) without depleting my ki pool?

>>47188081
I think players aren't happy when one is doing everything himself and they don't just because they chose a different class.

>>47187855
>>47187881
5e may be simple but with how versatile backgrounds and races can be it's not too difficult to make fun gimmicky builds. Thought I will admit as of right now there is very little content to go with for a gimmick build.

>>47188012
>what is the healer feat
>what is magic initiate
>what is inspiring leader
>what is a banneret
>what is a battlemaster

>>47188112
Play a fighter.

All of a Monk's abilities are based around Ki. They have a lot more in terms of control abilities than other martials do.

Contrast with battlemaster, who gets some control abilities with their damage, but can only ever use them 4x/rest regardless of level. OH monk can stun, throw, and knock enemies around a bunch of times per rest by level 5.

>>47188130
>5e may be simple but with how versatile backgrounds and races can be it's not too difficult to make fun gimmicky builds
I can definitely tell there's potential there, I'm just having trouble piecing something together, hence why I asked for ideas in the first place. Just trying to brainstorm a bit.

>>47186945
There's a difference between
> I don't have fun with martials
And
> Martials are useless.
Only the true statement is useful feedback.

>>47187302
It's an option if you have nothing else going on with your bonus action and don't want to invest feats in combat, like a bearbarian. The feat support is just bad and a TWF dervish/whirlwind/berserkerbarrage path would be nice.

>>47187581
The 2d8 is once per turn only, and the barbarian has much better chance to hit or crit on his turn.

>>47187671
You only have to resort to that if the wizard's Hide roll beat your passive perception in the first place.

>>47188173
>but can only ever use them 4x/rest regardless of level
mm, anon, they get to use it 6x short rest

>>47188124
I think you're theorycrafting, playing with an incompetent GM, or playing with a shitty group.

There simply aren't enough actions available in a turn to do what you're proposing a lone caster can do.

>>47188181
sorcerere warlock either for double EB shenanigans or for double GFM shenaningas

I played recently a high level game in which I was a DevotionPalandin3/DraconicSorcerer6/UndyinglightWarlock6 and I was dealing GFB+3xCha twice per attack, I had fun with it.

>>47188197
Misremembered. Apologies.

Point remains: one is damage with control, the other is control with damage.

>>47188135
>what is magic initiate
>>what is inspiring leader
>>what is a banneret
>>what is a battlemaster

My counter to that is exactly how effective is all of that?

Healer does not give alot of health and is really only good for stabilizing... But you still have to carry all those kits

Magic Initiate gives you only 1 lvl 1 spell and while some can be incredibly useful most are not that great or either bread and butters to be used multiple times. Then their is the DC which you need a good score for. Depending on cantrips chosen you may be a bit better off, but there is still the need for a good score

Inspiring Leader gives a shit amount of health and of you want more you have to get more CHA which caps out at a +5

Banneret is just shit

Battlemaster is pretty good.... But there is no reason to grab it past 3 levels

No to mention all the ASI's you are passing up for these when you could just take Cleric

I do see what your trying to prove though. But I will sadly disagree. Fighter's are DPR machines and nothing more. At lest in this edition they are generally the best at it though.

>>47188189
>You only have to resort to that if the wizard's Hide roll beat your passive perception in the first place.
Uh, not quite. He was going with fly+invis (which I know is impossible) and that wouldn't have any cue for you to pick up on. Knowing he's there is one thing, but knowing where to shoot is another thing entirely. On the ground, you could look for his footprints, but I'd say you need a per roll for that.

File: 4888135-2368990632-37494.jpg (58KB, 586x439px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 586x439px

>Revenant race
Raiden, he I come!

>>47188181
Look at >>47187977

Also, you could make a half orc war cleric with a greatsword and with the inspiring leader feat at level 4 and proficiency in the handdrum. Probably also soldier background. Not exactly a massive gimmick but would make for good RP.

>>47188256
>My counter to that is exactly how effective is all of that?
You said "can't Cleric at all," not "can't Cleric as effectively."

Don't move the goalposts and then call it a good argument.

>>47187672
Assuming you've got 20 Str, that's 4 of your ASI for +str, GWM, and MI. You have one left, two if you're V.Human. As for your attack, you have so much bonus damage on the attack already that using GWM is lowering your average damage. You're a moron.

>>47188189
Even if you're not investing feats in it and avoiding the bonus action totems you're swinging 1d6 weapons vs 1d12, and things like using bonus actions to Rage, magic weapons, brutal critical, etc all mean that you're probably better off just swinging a greataxe.

>>47188256
You can take two of those feats and still have as many ASI's as a cleric

I understand what you mean and I agree, but a fighter can be an effective backup healer just like a cleric can be an effective backup frontliner

It all balances out in the end, I feel

>>47187944
Someone made a build of a cleric and tried to do more damage than a fighter, so the counter build for the fighter did more damage, had more HP, and had the Healer feat, providing more healing than the cleric could with its remaining spell slots. Casters can do area damage, but they can't out-fighter a fighter.

Rolled 13, 4, 12, 14, 8, 3 = 54 (6d20)

>big fan of Dark souls
>Ask my DM if my sorcerer's focus can be a piece of crystal that has an illusion upon it so it looks like a small flame
>It wont shed light or gain any mechanical bonuses for this
>Just look like a pyromancer flame as a nod to dark souls
>Basically tells me to get fucked
My DM HATES fun. Any little thing like this he denies and tries to say we are trying to game the system or something. All I wont is a neat little touch with no mechanical benefits.

>>47188277
Read the PHB, dude
>"An invisible creature can’t be seen, so it can always try to hide. Signs of its passage might still be noticed, however, and it still has to stay quiet. In combat, most creatures stay alert for signs of danger all around"

Even if the wizard is invisible, if he goes invisible mid-combat everyone still knows where he is until he uses an action to Hide. Even then, you contest his Stealth check to the enemies' Perception checks, because they are aware you are around. If he's not hiding, there's always cues to pick up, be it the rustling of his robes, the staleness in the air, his smell, anything.

>>47188112
The highest sustained damage from a monk is shadows using opportunist, probably. OH's 5-point exploding heart technique is probably stronger, but costs more Ki. Either way, you're going to spend Ki to stun and flurry for max attacks and max chance to hit. You can multiclass with rogue instead and raise your maximum damage that way at the cost of stuns.

>>47183456
>8 days late
UA when?

>>47188526
http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/may-dungeon-masters-guild-review

>>47188498
>>47188277
> Arguing over a thing that isn't possible RAW anyway
This is why the shitposter comes back.

>>47188464
Have someone cast Continual Flame on it.

My PCs will soon stumble upon the writings of one of the BBEG's followers, containing descriptions of what the BBEG saw in their journey to the bottom of the pillar the world is built upon.

What are some strange, alien things they might have seen, and how would they/their more human followers interpret them in words?

>>47188498
Rules lawyer pls go. If someone goes invisible and moves, it is no way obvious where he is, unless he's walking on wet sand or snow.

What advantage does the Barbarian have over the Fighter to justify having two less feats? They both deal roughly the same damage and have roughly the same survivability. The Barbarian has some special features like Danger Sense, but the Fighter gets Action Surge and Indomitable. Is the Barbarian secretly the most useless class?

>>47187149
Any DM who doesn't want to deal with multiple Z levels in combat unless there's a birdman or Wizard running around with fucking flight speed isn't one worth playing with.

>>47188633
Same survivability? Bitch have you even seen how much damage a raging barbarian can soak up?

>>47188625
So you're telling me the fighter clad in heavy armor or the fumbling wizard have a better chance to hide than the rogue who trained his whole life for that? No way, buddy. Invisibility means advantage on your attacks and disadvantage on attacks against you. You are unseen, but not unheard. To be unheard and go generally unnoticed, you need to actually try and hide.

>>47187887
The only martials that get more skill proficiencies than casters are rogues and rangers. Rogues are the designated skill monkey class, and they're worse at it than the caster version of skill monkeys, Bards.

And nobody wants fighters to be able to do the same things casters can do. They want fighters to be able to do the same AMOUNT of things casters can do. Ideally, every class would have an equally large, exclusive slice of the game. But right now, the current status is that there are a whole host of things every class can do, and a whole host of things that are caster exclusive. It's not balanced. We need a martial exclusive way to interact with the game, that is as useful as spells are. IMO you can do this with weeaboo fightan magic, or you could just make skills mostly exclusive to martial classes, taking them away from caster classes.

>>47188633
Barbarians are fine. They get at least twice as much out of their Con, and a similar amount out of strength.

In a party with a Barbarian and a Fighter, both will contribute.

>>47188741
Also, rogues are basically like the only fun martial class anyways. If every martial class was balanced and designed like rogues, there wouldn't be a problem.

>>47188733

You're damn right the fumbling wizard or the fighter clad in heavy armour is better at hiding than the rogue who trained his whole life for thar if they're fucking invisible.

>>47187149
I'd allow it if the source of the knockback was below the target, such as attacking a foe uphill, knocking them diagonally up, and then moving in to juggle them.

>>47188633
>roughly the same survivability

Barbarians have significantly more survivability. Bigger hit dice and resistance to melee damage makes them tanky as fuck. Shit, if you go bear totem you get resistance to everything except psychic. Plus their natural AC can be stronger than plate armor at higher ability scores.

Aside from survivability, they can give themselves advantage to attack whenever they want (the enemy advantage is negated partially by aforementioned survivability), they get improved crit damage, and they're kings of strength checks.

>>47188820
Barbs are also great grapplers.

>>47188256
>My counter to that is exactly how effective is all of that?
Banneret is shit and can heal up to 20 HP to up to three creatures once per rest, so 180 HP during an average day.

Battle Master is better off dealing damage, but can give up to 11.5 average temp HP up to 6 or 7 times per rest, so an average of 117-136.5 per day.

Inspiring Leader gives up to 25 temp HP to up to 6 creatures per use, once per rest per creature, so 300 for a four person party, to 450 for a 6 person party. It even works on temporary minions. Every Necromancer should get his army an inspiring leader.

All this assumes you want to play a high Cha face so far, but Healer, which you left out, is the best yet. Just keep kits around and it heals up to 27.5 per person per rest. That's going to be 330 on an average day for a four person party, or 495 for a 6 person party.

A cleric can devote all his level 1-5 slots to heal 249 to each of 6 people with Prayer of healing, for an average of 996 for a four person party, or 1494 for a 6 person party, plus 38 HP from the level one Cure Wounds.

The banneret can heal in combat, but can't rouse those at 0 HP, so this is really all out of combat health considerations. You don't want to, or can't, use actions in combat to do this.

>exactly how effective is all of that?
The healer feat is like 1/3 of a cleric's potential 1-5 spell slot output.

>>47188381
Quick calcs says, level 20 against AC 19, Greataxe does 37.8825 with no feats and dual hand axe does 38.31375 with no feats. You can throw the hand axes, and you can start with the greataxe, activate rage and attack, drop G.Axe, draw Hand Axe. Next turn, draw another hand axe and you're TWF with no loss in efficiency.

Or, you're level 20. Just rage constantly.

>>47188546
oh thanks

>>47188782
I call bullshit on that and so do the game's rules. Again, what invisibility does is it lets you use stealth whenever you want, even in bright daylight with no cover. Surely not even the greatest rogue can do that without magic. But being invisible doesn't make you unnoticeable. People can still hear your footsteps, your clothes or armor moving, your breathing. A rogue will still have a much better chance at hiding than the invisible heavy armored dude, or the invisible wizard who never trained to be stealthy.

File: 58d198adc00d6045d3c1288433460a34.jpg (61KB, 673x1000px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 673x1000px

I love watching the butthurt caster fag get BTFO every thread.
I usually just lurk these threads, but he is such a persistent troll I almost always recognize him now in his first couple posts.
Kind of reminds me of virt, in a way. Doesn't feel like a real community until you have your own dedicated troll.

I finally found something that a martial can do that a caster cannot do, at all.

Now, when it comes to lifting, or moving object, you can only push, lift, or pull something up to 30 times you strength score, and you have a movement speed of 5 feet while doing so. What this means, is that someone with 20 strength can move 600 pounds.

That's not so much. Tenser's floating disk can move 500 pounds faster than 5 feet, and telekinesis can move 1000 pounds. Well, Aspect of the Bear gives you double your carrying capacity, both for carry weight, and for lift weight. That's means your 20 strength barbarian is now lifting 1200 pounds, and can carry 600 pounds without an issue. Goliaths turn this up to eleven. Now, Goliaths always count as a creature of one size larger for carrying capacity, and to push, drag, and lift. That's means your barbarian can lift a ton and still walk around, and carry over a thousand pounds like its nothing.

Casters simply can't match that. Polymorph, enlarge/reduce, and enhance ability, the only spells that could increase carry weight, all require material complement, and concentration. Therefore, the only real use of casting those spells is just to improve the weight a goliath bearbarian can lift.

tl;dr casters can't even lift

>>47188933
Oops, rereading that I kind of misspoke. I mean the dude who always tried the casters>martial argument, my bad if that wasn't clear.

>>47188948
How exactly does he get BTFO if most people agree with his point?

>>47188968
Hey there! I love you dude, you keep doing you.

>>47188936

Because most campaigns consist of lifting things. Are we playing Tractors and Tow Trucks?

>>47188936
While funny, not true.
>caster uses simulacrum
>instantly doubles carrying capacity
>caster polymorphs a familiar into a large creature
>gets huge carrying capacity

etc, etc.

>>47188918
An invisible rogue will have an advantage over an invisible wizard, yes.
>But being invisible doesn't make you unnoticeable. People can still hear your footsteps, your clothes or armor moving, your breathing.
Yes, but not passively. They need to strain to notice him, unless his prints are obvious. Especially in combat where there are other sources of sound all around.

>>47188741
Killing shit all day is the martial way.

>whole host of things that are caster exclusive.
You mean being a taxi and an ER? You think that makes you powerful? You think people find that fun? When it comes to getting shit done, everyone can participate. I haven't seen any proof otherwise.

>>47188741
Bards are good at utility, but that's all they're good at. At least a rogue can meaningfully contribute to combat with sneak attacks. Bards will chuck out a few spells and then sit in the corner throwing cantrips, crying about how he doesn't want to waste anymore spell slots or that he didn't prepare the right spells. It's particularly pathetic because all he'll throw out is a few save-or-suck spells which maybe one or two enemies will fail the save for and then recover from the next round.

>>47189054
>bards
>prepared spells

>>47188933
It's annoying. 5e really is the only edition (outside of 4e which has its own problems for its own reasons) that has managed to balance casters and martials, at least in combat. Sure they can do things martials can't, but honestly it's not unfair to the martials. They have their niche, and a good dm is going to make sure every player gets to shine. If you don't shut down the asshole wizard, or anyone in general, trying to overtake anyones role, then they're a bad DM, just as bad as the player for ruining the fun for everyone else. Sure a necromancer CAN make an army, but you would just keep an army around at all times, because the you're ruining it for everyone. The Paladin, Rogue, Fighter, or Barbarian bursting so much damage they end encounters before anyone can do anything are just as bad. You need to balance the game around the class differences to be fun. Sure the wizard can teleport across dimensions, he still can't move that 1001 pound chunk of bedrock out of the way, so he gets the barbarian to lift it and move it.

People who say "lol casters are so much better than martial" are assholes. They don't realize that they play a different role, and combat is as big of a pillar as exploration, and honestly, most "shit casters can do better", is evil, like fucking mind control.

>>47189023
You have to make a special effort if you want to hide while you're in combat. EIther way, you roll Stealth to determine if you go unnoticed, and it's up to the DM how far away you might be heard.

>>47188968
> If I samefag hard enough, it'll look like I have friends
Same time next thread?

>>47189117
>fucking mind control.
Yeah, casters are better at getting other people to do things that the caster can't do. Wait-a-minute. Things casters can't do is implicit in the value of mind control.

>>47189023
Nope. In combat is precisely when the enemies are alert to anyone trying to creep up on them, especially if they just saw that wizard going invisible. Out of combat, though, of course it's only their passive perception anyone has to beat. You are unnecessarily buffing invisibility, and here I thought I was being too generous by giving advantage to Stealth checks.

You fail to realize that a creature, even though invisible, can still make noise and draw attention towards itself. It's that simple, really.

>>47189166
>if I accuse a bunch of people of samefagging, I won't have to deal with their arguments.

Nah. I know you like martials brah, but that doesn't mean they don't have fundamental design problems and that other people can't recognize it.

>>47189195
> winging about perceived personal slights constitutes an argument
Next thread, then. Keep on trucking.

>more shitting about perceived caster/martial imbalance with no suggestions for fixing it

Shitposters sure do you like complaining nonstop about shit without wanting to try to fix it or playing a different game. It's almost like they only post this shit to bait others into arguing back and forth pointlessly because it gets their little chodes hard.

>>47189005
That's not how simulacrum works. Two creatures lifting doesn't change anything, and help action only gives advantage on checks. Can't polymorphing CR 0 into anything large, dumbass, since all familiar options are tiny anyway.
Therefore, your wizard can still only lift a maximum of a whopping 600 pounds, with 20 strength.

WRONG AGAIN 3.PFFAG

>>47189178
It was a fucking example. There are spells that do that shit, such as the horribly named friends cantrip.

Stop living in your dillusional world

>>47189232
People have made suggestions though. see >>47188741

>>47189260
>cast simulacrum
>DM tells me it can only give me advantage on strength checks to lift my 1200 pound bag
>i can't simply make another bag and give him 600 lbs to hold
>have simulacrum cast wish
>generate infinite simulacrums
>they call cast mage hand, applying 10lbs of force to the large 1200 lbs bag
>the DM rules it doesn't lift.

That's just silly anon. I bet you're the type of person that shits on fighters any time they try to do something out of the ordinary because muh sacred cow rules. In other words, the worst kind of person.

>>47189276
Yes, Casters have mind control spells (not friends), and mind control spells are valuable. Mind control spells are valuable because:
>A)They get people to do things for you that you could already do for yourself.
>B)They get people to do things for you that you could not do for yourself.

Pretty sure it's B. That conflicts with the rhetoric that casters can do anything.

There the punchline. It's dead now.

Obviously, the real purpose of mind control is to have mind controlled servants do everything because why the fuck not?

>>47189117
>Sure the wizard can teleport across dimensions, he still can't move that 1001 pound chunk of bedrock out of the way, so he gets the barbarian to lift it and move it.

isn't it telling that the best example you could come up with was a niche case that is only possible for one option of one subclass of one martial - and potentially irrelevant, since casters have methods of bypassing obstacles like that - compared to just one spell (avaliable to every full caster) that can fundamentally transform campaigns?

it would be nice if there were more features like those avaliable to the totem warrior, but they are sadly lacking.

>>47189322
> sacred cow
The shitposter's "media conspiracy."

File: skeletongonnagetyou.gif (3MB, 230x173px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 230x173px

>>47188612
At the bottom of the pillar, imperceptible in the un-light, lay a flat and barren expanse stretching endlessly into the distance, devoid of all things save emptiness. But curiously, the pillar sat upon it with no base, disappearing into the ground as a pier column vanishes into water. Sensing this was not the pillar's terminus, Glorious BBEG descended further, past the bottom of creation, through that infinite and unremarkable interface, into a realm awash in confusion and horror. In the nethermost reaches of that inconceivable place, loathesome Chaos gibbers and blasphemes; an amorphous, writhing blight which heaves and slops endlessly through the blackened void, searching the nothingness with vast limbs of ever-shifting description, raking the desolate hollow with its abominable touch, groping blindly at the vacuum, for it had no eyes or ears or other organs, only the occasional protrudence whose stark featurelessness stood momentarily in depraved mockery of where a face should be before sinking once again into the ever-shifting and foaming blight. Slowly, inexorably, that alien, wretched enormity pulsed and lurched along the pillar, travelling the immeasurable length towards its singular destination with hungry purpose, gnawing and guttering, howling incoherently at the void, its rheumy, repellant shrieking snapping O Beneficent BBEG from his mindless daze, hounding him back beyond the barrier between our worlds. And as Great BBEG raced to us with warnings of that indescribable nightmare, he glanced back at that blank plane, the shield which kept all eyes from glimpsing the discordant profanity below, he saw it ripple.

File: 9402810_orig.png (509KB, 364x552px) Image search: [Google]

509KB, 364x552px

So, as the dude who called out the caster hater.

What is the build for the caster who can outshine every other class at once? Like, how do we make it?

>>47188633
>two fewer feats
If your party ever gets near that level. More like one.

>>47189388
Or C)they get people to do things that you could conceivably do for yourself, but are narratively or mechanically inconvenient to do so.

>>47189322
You're still only lifting 600 pounds, you aren't your clone you spent 12 hours to make so you could move two 600 pounds bags in the time it takes to move one, and you still need a lot of snow, and a fuck ton of ruby dust, not to mention you are blatantly munckining

>>47189443
Like making daiquiris. And blowjobs.

>>47189166
>>47188979
I agree with him. He might be a faggot arguing things the wrong way, but it's definitely true that anything a creative martial can do outside of combat, casters can equal on their own and trump with spells. Casters are strictly superior at the other pillars of the game, while also not sucking shit at combat (even if damage isn't their specialty).

Now, it's fine if you want to say the martials' tradeoff for doing good damage this time around is all their usefulness and interest outside of a fight, but you're a faggot.

The #1 propagator of this unfortunate situation isn't WotC, though, it's shitty DMs who want the martials to obey physics (except when physics works in their favor or goes beyond numbers in the PHB/DMG) but will give casters the fucking world on a plate because they're doing something vaguely magical, even if there's no spell slot / resource expenditure involved.

This isn't to say martials are bad. They are better than they have ever been. But they're still second class citizens who can easily and endlessly be upstaged by any caster with a mind to.

>>47189501

File: 1421606464310.jpg (505KB, 1600x2000px) Image search: [Google]

505KB, 1600x2000px

>>47189500
...but, how, exactly?
Like, in real play lets say levels 1-15.
How does a caster outplay every class at once?
Hoowwwww

>>47189434
Wizards

Transform a tarrasque into a kitten, summon 150 skeletons, change the laws of physics, get one of the two save-or-dies in 5e, create an infinite army of snowman clones, who can all cast wish, freeze time, terraform the planet, among things.

But to do most of this shit is pretty much "no fun allowed"

>>47189434
Hurr hurr I B him TFO
I agree with you, but shut up.

>>47189434
wizard or bard with simulacrum and true polymorph.

the end result is a wizard or bard with a high-CR pet like a dragon or a balor. the pet will outperform any martial in their own niche, while the wizard or bard is still free to cast spells (depending on the arrangement, you may or may not have concentration, but it's a small price to pay for the benefit). bard might be slightly better due to covering skills too, so you can out-skill the rogue while also out-damaging the fighter with your pet and also casting spells.

>>47189546
>casting Wish
Utterly irrelevant to like 99.99% of games.

>>47189546
Most of those are 9th level spells, unable to be cast until level 17 (which %90 of games never reach it seems) and are recommended to require quests to find.
Also, I don't see how that renders martials obsolete

>>47189536
>martial makes a skill check
>caster makes the same skill check

>martial performs a physical feat
>caster with the same stats performs the same physical feat

>martial comes up with an ingenious plan to do ______ and executes it
>caster can come up with the exact same plan and execute it, or do it far more easily with ~magic~

>caster casts a spell
>martial doesn't

The only time martial wins is if the contest is "who can attack more times in a round".
Wait, Quickened Spell and multi-hit / AoE spells. Actually, "who can physically attack more times in a round".
Shit, summons and infinite armies or bullshit. "Who can personally physically attack more times in a round".