[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / bant / biz / c / can / cgl / ck / cm / co / cock / d / diy / e / fa / fap / fit / fitlit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mlpol / mo / mtv / mu / n / news / o / out / outsoc / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / spa / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vint / vip / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y ] [Search | Free Show | Home]

/5eg/ D&D Fifth Edition General: Animal Companion Edition

This is a blue board which means that it's for everybody (Safe For Work content only). If you see any adult content, please report it.

Thread replies: 366
Thread images: 39

File: ALL THE AWARDS.jpg (124KB, 500x679px) Image search: [Google]
ALL THE AWARDS.jpg
124KB, 500x679px
>Official /5eg/ Mega Trove v3:
https://mega.nz/#F!BUdBDABK!K8WbWPKh6Qi1vZSm4OI2PQ

>Pastebin with homebrew list, resources and so on:
http://pastebin.com/X1TFNxck

>/5eg/ Discord server
https://discord.gg/0rRMo7j6WJoQmZ1b

What's the coolest shit you've done with an animal companion, ranger or no?
>>
>>47467121
Threeway with an elf princess.
>>
File: 1372909345087.jpg (70KB, 930x834px) Image search: [Google]
1372909345087.jpg
70KB, 930x834px
>>47467121
Probably not the best thread to ask this,
but our current GM is out, and the temp has suggested taking a break from current campaign by playing 4e.
Given that the other option is a pathfinder game that's been going for some time, where i'd also have to learn the rules (plus, pathfinder), I'll be willing to at least take a look at 4e. Is there threads/generals for it? even old threads I can look at in archives.

My main question though is: If I want to just go full combat for these games as a kind of break, how easy is 4e to pick up from 5e, and is there anything you guys can suggest that would be fun to play.
>>
Does anyone have a pdf copy of Ghosts of Dragonspear Castle?
>>
>>47467252
We had a thread just the other day. I can't tell you what's arrived though but I'm sure there is something worthwhile about.

If all else fails, just make a new one and ask some questions. There's enough interest around here.
>>
>>47467554
>arrived
*archived
>>
>DM wants to make a RP heavy campaign
>doesn't do character voices
>obviously doesn't give a shit about 99% of his npcs
>gets upset when we don't RP perfectly

whats up with this? did he just watch critical role and then say I WANT TO DO THAT or what
>>
File: alcohol.jpg (75KB, 504x504px) Image search: [Google]
alcohol.jpg
75KB, 504x504px
>>47467894
>my group is mostly new to DND
>want to get them into RPing their characters instead of just playing themselves
>get nervous about doing NPC voices and often end up speaking about NPCs and quoting what they say in 3rd person

at least we have a few drinks while playing
>>
File: latest[1].jpg (59KB, 448x473px) Image search: [Google]
latest[1].jpg
59KB, 448x473px
>>47467121
I wouldn't know. the one time I played a ranger and got far enough to get an animal companion (a wolf) the DM was kind of a by the book dickbag. basically if it wasn't specifically mentioned in core we couldn't do it. at least not without jumping through 50 hoops.

I guess I should make this relevant to 5e, so I'll just say that I'm sad to hear bestmaster ranger is underpowered this edition :/
>>
>>47467933
>want to get them into RPing their characters
>get nervous about doing NPC voices and often end up speaking about NPCs and quoting what they say in 3rd person

If you're not willing to get into it and are too nervous to do it then they're not going to.

Here's an idea: instead of attempting to force yourself and your players to do something that neither of you are good at and that some probably don't want to do at all, just play a relaxed game where your players play what they want and you just bullshit npcs and etc

it'll be much more fun for everyone and you will probably feel more fufillied after a session as a GM. If you really really want some deep RP well you need to git gud and get different players or you need to curb your expectations
>>
>>47467985
To be honest, we all have a lot of fun every session, I'm just very critical and end up feeling like I made mistakes left and right. The players have a ton of fun and as sessions progress get more and more into their characters, which is aided by me gradually giving them tidbits from their backstory leading to eventual personal story arcs for all of them.

I usually do end up doing voices for characters, but sometimes I can't bring myself to. Their most beloved NPCs so far have been ones that I actually role played, one of which was a very short lived semi-sentient fish-folk thing that they could only speak to with the talk to animals spell, and which simply panicked and struggled against its bindings if they asked anything too complex.

Thank you, though. Whenever things do feel too forced, I definitely step back. I also let them get as into roleplaying as they want, I plan maybe an hour of content and they turn it into a four hour session having fun around towns.
>>
>>47467530
I thought it was in the MEGA, but apparently not. I'll upload it in a few hours whe
>>
File: that sword.png (402KB, 322x574px) Image search: [Google]
that sword.png
402KB, 322x574px
/5eg/, I need a judgement call. This is from the Sword Coast book that's in the Mega. What kind of sword would y'all say this is, a Greatsword or a Longsword? I need to know because I *really* want to use it with my next character.
>>
>>47468024
Looks like a two-handed scimitar or Falchion to me.

Ask your DM if you guys could homebrew in some new weapons. I've always felt that there was a serious lack of a 2-handed dex weapon (quarterstaff doesn't count)
>>
>>47468024
bastard sword lmao

no but really, given how exaggeratedly huge greatswords are in this game, that's probably a longsword. I mean that character is holding it with one hand, and the long grip leaves the ability to wield it two-handed (also longswords being versatile basically made the concept behind bastard swords sorta obsolete, so...)
>>
>>47468024
Stats-wise: probably just a greatsword.
>>
>>47468011
Thanks, anon!
>>
>>47468045
Oh, I'm not making an Elf, just a human fighter. I just really like the look of that sword. I was actually planning on wielding a halberd before I saw that and fell in love with it.

>>47468045
>>47468048
>>47468050
>3 anons
>3 different answers
welp
>>
>>47468066
well then it's up to you mate.

If you just wanna be strength just take a longsword or greatsword and describe it as that. It really doesn't matter, any DM who wouldn't let you say "My greatsword looks like this" is not a DM you should play with
>>
>>47468066
>welp
yeah sure, but I'm the only one who pointed out they're wielding it one handed while everyone else is suggesting two-handed weapons lol
>>
>>47468024
Is there a reason you can't just fluff it as whatever sword works best for your character? I mean, I've played games where we've treated curved blades as longswords stats-wise and it worked fine.
>>
>>47468081
>>47468101
I know. I mean trying to decide which weapon to base it off of, the greatsword or the longsword.
>>
>>47468122
it doesn't matter. Pick one that works best for how you play your character.
>>
>>47468135
I'm making a lvl1 STR fighter who was going to use a Halberd instead, anon.
>>
>>47468122
Longsword. Thar's actually fairly close to longsword length in real life. Look at the scabbard, it doesn't even tough ground. Greatswords on the other hand are so big you have to strap them on your back.
>>
>>47468149
and?

if you want to be more tanky make your thing a longsword and use a shield. If you want more damage, make your thing a greatsword.

your choice. you can describe your weapon in any way that doesn't effect the actual game (IE you can't say "well actually my longsword is REALLY long so it has a 10ft reach.")

anything else doesn't matter. It's fluff. flavor.
>>
i like 5e but why is the character customization options so limited?

where's the prestige classes and stuff?

it just seems so homogenized
>>
>>47468162
That makes sense. I always liked the old Bastard Sword anyways.
>>
>>47468261
>i like 5e but why is the character customization options so limited?
compared to what? 3.x? 3.x may have given you a bunch of options, but fuck if it didn't have balance issues. inb4 "but you can't make any game balanced without making everything the same!!" fuck that noise, nothing's gonna be perfect, doesn't mean you act like there's nothing shitty about the system.

>where's the prestige classes and stuff?
prestige classes were DMG material from the time they were first introduced in 3rd edition, so I find it hard to consider the comparison fair. in any case, a lot of the options prestige classes gave have been integrated into class archetypes in 5e. I mean really, core alone how many prestige class options did a base class get?
>>
>>47468261
I feel like that was kind of the point. One of the biggest complaints people have about 3.5 is that there are TOO MANY options, and alot of them are "trap" options that end up being significantly weaker or sub-optimal compared to other choices. All the options just become bloat that makes the system harder to learn and somewhat of a turnoff to new players.

Also 5e balances caster classes alot better than 3.5 and their Wizard=God setup.
>>
>>47468261
Every class has multiple ways to be different from other players playing the same class built into the player handbook, with tons more released in supplements. Many prestige classes were also shit. I loved 3.5, but it had major issues, and a lot of them were addressed by 5e.
>>
so im looking at the d&d site, and the mega
are the supplemental sourcebooks now in 5e just bigass adventures with barely anything in the face of new items/monsters/classes?
>>
>>47468362
Pretty much. Most of the extra content so far has been the hit or miss UA,and they're even scaling that back.
>>
>>47468362
those aren't sourcebooks mate

if I'm not mistaken, the only sourcebooks they've released are the sword coast adventurer's guide and the elemental evil thing that was free.

oh, and that Zendikar thing, too
>>
>>47468135
THIS.

If you're not sure whether it's a longsword or greatsword, then you can get away with doing either, or even scimitar or falchion. It's so close to any of the above, that no one would argue with you.
>>
>>47468372
>>47468369
yeah i wasnt sure what they were called and just fell on the old title. sword coast is called a supplemental, but elemental evil had races and spells and shit, despite not being one (and also not being called elemental evil)
curse of strhad clearly calls itself an adventure so thats obvious but then i wasnt sure about rise of tiamat and out of the abyss without having to look
princes of the apocalypse (elemental evil) and sword coast are the only two that actually "add" anything right? and even then most of apocalypse's additions are in the elemental evil players companion?
>>
File: 1463583700770.jpg (371KB, 1067x1600px) Image search: [Google]
1463583700770.jpg
371KB, 1067x1600px
Do you prefer mythic fantasy or gritty fantasy? I'm having trouble juggling my love of cosmos-spanning adventures and grimdark darksouls adventures.
>>
>>47468402
wait no im a potato, sword coast is the only "actual" addition, it seems most of the adventures that add stuff have a supplement
its just not separate like princes/evil
>>
>>47468419
Both extremes suck. Too much Mythic and you might as well be playing an MMO, too much Gritty and you end up exactly like Dark Souls, grimdark angst where nothing the players do really matters and the lethality turns things into a meat-grinder (which works fine for a videogame, but not so much for a roleplay).

I always try to strike a balance where there's enough fantasy that the world is clearly isn't real-life reality, but serious enough that the world still follows it's own rules in an organic way. For example, if magic has the ability to summon water from thin air, you can sure bet the armies of the world and any kind of sailing vessel is going to use that to cover that logistical need.

Tone-wise... it's OK to let the players be heroes... but at the same time there should be enough realism that even heroes have vulnerabilities... and anything they can achieve, other people in the world can achieve as well.
>>
>>47468402
>>47468420
EEPC was supposed to be a seperate book, like the player version of Princes of the Apocalypse, but they ended up cancelling it and releasing the content for free (which was really cool on their part).

as far as I know that was the only adventure that added any real amount of player content. it seems expected that a published adventure (especially a long one) would introduce some new content, but I'm not sure I'd consider that really useful (at least not worth buying the adventure for some new magic items and spells...)
>>
File: clYoyTN.jpg (258KB, 1035x847px) Image search: [Google]
clYoyTN.jpg
258KB, 1035x847px
What are some common spells for 5e casters that would drastically change civilization? Obviously Clerics being able to create water would make religion incredibly vital in desert societies, but what else?
>>
File: 1461145101386.png (42KB, 500x612px) Image search: [Google]
1461145101386.png
42KB, 500x612px
>>47468419
5e does NOT work for mythic multiverse-saving fantasy because of lel bounded accuracy.

Search your heart.
>>
>>47468402
All the published adventures have some new things, yes. Not a lot of them, but still...

Hoard of the Dragon Queen/Rise of Tiamat don't add much at all. The most interesting thing you'll find in those is stats for Tiamat. There's also some Drakes and several different cultists in a clear hierarchy. There's maybe a couple of new magic items, one being a sentient weapon.

Princes of the Apocalypse has stats for several different elemental cultists which look pretty neat, and also for the four evil Elemental Princes. It has a bunch of new items as well, like the Weird Tank, Wingwear, and a boomerang; and some relics, too.

Out of the Abyss has some interesting mundane items like a repeating crossbow. It has stats for every fucking Demon Lord, which is amazing. It probably has other stuff that I can't remember now... some drow magic items, I think.

Curse of Strahd has some really cool new gothic horror monsters! A gargantuan creeping hut, a guardian portrait, a psycho doll... On top of some neat magic items.

No real new class options, though. That's only supplement and UA material.
>>
>>47468048
A Bastard sword is just another name for a Longsword.
>>
>>47468525
thanks for the breakdown, i was a whore for sourcebooks and new stuff in 3.5 even though i never used most of them. even if there is alot less stuff (which is what it looks to be) this helped me kinda put in order the ones i want to look at or get first
>>
File: MAGIC RUNES.gif (2MB, 480x296px) Image search: [Google]
MAGIC RUNES.gif
2MB, 480x296px
>>47468503
Any form of long-distance teleportation would completely negate the need for things like trade-caravans.

Long range communication would change the world like the telephone did.

The ability to summon wind would drastically change sailing.

Druidic plant-manipulation magic could increase crop yields by multiples of dozens.

Healing magic completely replaces all medical science, and shapeshifting/polymorphing would be the equivalent of cheap plastic surgery with none of the risks/downsides
>>
>>47468508
>DM threw bounded accuracy out the window
he doesn't understand when I try to explain why only having a 20% or less chance to hit, from what was around a 50% chance to hit doesn't work.
The party should be be getting better at shit, and facing tougher enemies with it that keeps it balanced, not worse.
>>
>>47468503
Goodberry. Farming would historically have required as much as 90% of the population working towards supporting that so magical food production leads to a huge increase in available labour.

Mending and Guidance are big deals too. As cantrips they're implicitly easy to learn and can be used repeatedly once learned. If a standard nurse or doctor has 10-12 Wis and a +2 proficiency bonus to medicine then Guidance is doubling their bonus sort of thing. Similar things apply to other non-heroic skilled workers.
>>
>>47468508
>>47468677
Yeah, I mean everyone knows the real legendary heroes are actually 30% harder to hit than what 5th ed allow. To deny that just doesn't make any sense
>>
>>47468565
not in 3.5 it isn't. that's why I said "lmao"

>>47468447
how do you mean? like clerics just casting create water? the highest level water conjuration spell is Tsunami, and the maximum amount of water you can create is a 300x300x50 ft. rectangle, hardly enough to get anywhere, not to mention it ends in 6 rounds anyway...


>>47468641
all this implies that sort of magical shit is common, which d&d has always tried to imply that it's not.

also long-distance teleportation is high level, only allows you to teleport so much, and is expensive enough that it wouldn't be able to effectively replace trade-caravans.

druids would have to be convinced en-masse to fuck around with nature in order to make crop wields larger than usual. good aligned druids might do this in times of need, as might neutral druids if convinced, but they probably couldn't be convinced to make that a regular thing.
>>
>>47468055
Here u go m8.
https://mega.nz/#!h5BVwAKA!O-VZEMOC3umf8z3ezdNjNm5MQz5-m_SqJjovtr_mLE8

Can probably be put into the MEGA also, I swear it used to be. Maybe disappeared with going from v2 to v3?
>>
>>47468924
>(also longswords being versatile basically made the concept behind bastard swords sorta obsolete, so...)
The concept behind a bastard sword is not made obsolete by Versatile longswords because longswords and bastard swords are the same weapon.
>>
Does pyrotechnics consume/extingish flaming sphere?
>>
File: Joke_over_your_head[1].jpg (18KB, 425x404px) Image search: [Google]
Joke_over_your_head[1].jpg
18KB, 425x404px
>>47468958
ugh, okay look. in 3.x longswords were one-handed weapons that did 1d8 damage. bastard swords were two-handed weapons that did 1d10 damage. you could use either with martial weapon proficiency BUT if you took Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Bastard Sword) you could wield a bastard sword with one hand.

in 5e there is no "bastard sword", but since the character was holding the sword with one hand when it can clearly be wielded with two I JOKINGLY said "lol it's a bastard sword" implying it's the 3.5 incarnation of the bastard sword.
>>
>>47469087
>3.X has separate rules for bastard swords and longswords
Jesus fuck, that shitty system is so over engineered. People joke about glaives and halberds in 5E but I'd take that before over exaggeration of miniscule or non existent differences any day.
>>
>>47469137
I liked how 4e used to-hit bonuses as an additional variable to make weapons distinct and give lower damage weapons other advantages.
>>
>>47469137
katanas are just +1 bastard swords
>>
How to become a lich:

>Reach Wizard 17
>Cast True Polymorph on yourself, turning yourself into a Lich
>Maintain concentration for 1 hour
>Permanently be a Lich

Right?
>>
>>47468924
>get anywhere

Pretty sure anon was talking about DRINKING the water. You know... when you're on a ship... in the ocean... which is all SALT water...
>>
>>47469324
Lich is challenge 21
>>
>>47469484
Motherfucker
>>
File: 20140725-01jpg[1].jpg (181KB, 1200x765px) Image search: [Google]
20140725-01jpg[1].jpg
181KB, 1200x765px
Does the 5E starter set include any miniatures or maps ? Any previous editions' starters that are still worth picking up ?
>>
>>47469657
i think its tokens, a map, a level 1-4 adventure, and a set of dice
i might be thinking of a different edition starter though so... not much help there
>>
>>47469324
>>47469484
you can become a demilich (CR 18)
>>
>>47469657

I have the 5e starter set. The adventure book has maps in it but no play mat maps and no minis sadly. Helps keep the price down though so there's that. Personally I think the 3.5 starter set is pretty good, probably because it was my first one. Comes with map boards, basic adventure (which is shit compared to LMoP) and a dozen or so minis, all of which are really nice. The 3.5 starter set could perhaps be worth a pick up still, but i'm not sure I would myself even though I enjoyed it alot.
>>
So what are some good DM's Guild content? Free is preferred but if content is good and paid i'm okay with that. I've got a little bit of funds and I want to pick up some new options and just material in general. Any recommendations?
>>
>>47470012
Blood hunter, blood magic, gunslinger, deathbloom druid
>>
reading through sword coast and am just curious as i cant think of why this would be

what purpose would a "small penknife" have in a writing kit along with the quill ink and paper?
>>
>>47470136
Penknives are used to sharpen quills
>>
>>47470208
bah thats it
i couldn't for the life of me think why you would cut up paper with it when the only thing other than a small folded paper, was an expensive as fuck book you borrowed
>>
>>47470241
ur dumb lol
>>
Is anything worth multiclassing into as a monk? The only things that match up stat-wise is Ranger or Druid, and neither of those synergise with Monk. Dex Fighter? Cleric?
>>
>>47470241
Or a map, or a letter.

My fighter has taken up cartography as a proficiency, it's awfully useful.
>>
>>47470546
If you're Shadow then going into Rogue or Warlock (for Devil's Sight) after getting shadowstep can be good.
>>
>>47470546
Rogue if you're a shadow monk
Fighter if you're open hand

>>47470670
>cast darkness on enemy
>shadowstep behind him
>unsheathe shortsword
Nothin personnel kid
>>
>>47470670
I was actually looking at Sun Soul from the SCAG. Light Cleric would be cool thematically, but is lacklustre thematically.

From looking through the PHB, Battlemaster looks like a decent 3-level dip. The character will be coming in at level 10, so Monk 7 / Battlemaster 3. I'd give up three ki points and an ASI (and ultimately lose the Monk 18 and 20 capstones should we get that far), but gain Action Surge, Second Wind, a Fighting Style, and three manoeuvres.
>>
>>47470859
>Light Cleric would be cool thematically, but is lacklustre thematically

Lacklustre MECHANICALLY. I should pay attention to the words I'm typing.
>>
>>47470241
Plus it's a free relatively concealable dagger, which is nice

>>47470561
How useful is it really? Are you playing an exploration-style campaign?
>>
>>47470859
Depending how much you want the lv17 feature you could push it one more level into fighter to get that ASI

Personally I wouldn't multiclass if I were to play saiyamonk, it should be kept pure
>>
Do you guys think Wizards puts classes and options and feats and many other character options in it that are reasonably weaker so it makes people want to homebrew stuff?

It gets the community working together on things and brings people back. Plus they outwardly say the DM can change anything he wants and even gives him the tools to do it.
>>
>>47470910
Not really, no

So yeah 2 subclasses are kinda weak and a few feats feel more like ribbons but there is no ivory tower philosophy in 5e, everything is more or less balanced

The reason why they encourage homebrew is because you can't please everyone, and the simplest thing in the world is to say "if you don't like it, then homebrew it"
>>
Am I retarded or is the 5eg approved homebrew list gone from the pastebin? And if it is, could we remove that from the OP?
>>
>>47471207
You're retarded.
>>
>>47470879
>How useful is it really?
First, it reduces travel time when we are going trough a mapped area, and the DM gives me a bonus to foraging if I already foraged here, and second when we report to our superiors we can actually pinpoint where to deploy people, where we are going to investigate next (in case we don't come back, you know).
>>
>variant human don't exist
>but everyone gets free feat at lvl 1

what would you make? Me I'd get mobile+booming blade from lvl 1
>>
>>47471318
Neat, your DM is a cool guy

>>47471725
I tried this once
Didn't work out too well
>>
>>47468122
>the greatsword or the longsword.
those are the same thing
>>
>>47471792
the lvl1 free feat or the mobile booming blade?
>>
>>47471725
Warcaster / Booming Blade / Command is sweet too.
>>
File: 29115465_puycthe_red_knight.jpg (68KB, 433x600px) Image search: [Google]
29115465_puycthe_red_knight.jpg
68KB, 433x600px
Need some good Personality Traits/Ideals/Bonds/Flaws for what's essentially a "Fey Knight". Hand 'em over /5eg/.
>>
>>47471862
The free feat

It's not too bad but some players come up with really strong stuff that might force you to up the CR on encounters by a lot
>>
>>47471945
So either everyone get awesome feats or get some of the meh/good feats. Or it will feel like they have a level on you.
>>
>>47468303
You can make the vast majority of older edition concepts in 5e if you look at what the system has instead of trying to do it exactly the way you did in 3.5 anyway. Metamagic means dipping sorcerer instead of taking feats now. Doing special stuff with weapons means dipping fighter now. That covers like 99% of what people actually tried to do in 3.5 outside of the really game-breaking stuff.
>>
>>47470859
The monk 18 ability is really damn good if you think you'll actually get there and be able to use it for any significant period of time.
>>
>>47467121
>What's the coolest shit you've done with an animal companion

Made a recurring NPC that was hunting the party. A real badass hellknight sort of character with a Hellhound companion. He'd be tracking them for a past crime, and it was really only the two of them. If the party actually faced the guy they probably could have killed him, but they were so intimidated by him that they ran every goddamn time. It was hilarious.
>>
Just to be sure, can a bard be hit by his own spell (in our case Sleep) if he's in the AoE?
>>
File: Alucard.png (327KB, 565x428px) Image search: [Google]
Alucard.png
327KB, 565x428px
So, how's your guys Curse of Strahd campaign? Has Strahd killed all of you yet, or have your players managed to actually slay the vampire?
>>
>>47472409
Unless the spell says it doesn't specifically, there's no reason at all why a bard should be immune to his own AoE, or ANY caster class for that matter.
>>
>>47472464
He argued that because his spell was a song, it would be very weird if he would be affected by it. Thankfully he was only joking when he used jigglypuff as a reference.
>>
So I was thinking of making a few archetypes using the same "1/3 caster" phylosophy as the EK and AT but using the monk's ki

That way people can get the "swordsage" and "ninja" flavor much the way that one brawler homebrew captures the thug/wrestler type
>>
>>47468419
I';m a sucker for Planescape, so mythic for me.
>>
>>47472447
Constant scheduling issues have prevented my group from actually getting started, on the bright side this has given me a ton of prep time so I made loot index cards for death house and got the full map printed, now I just need construction paper to block off unseen rooms
>>
>>47472495
Your reply to that "Well, you're right, your spell is a song and it would be weird that ANYONE would be effected by that. Thanks for pointing that out to me, your spell fails."
>>
>>47472549
Do you have 4 cards for the 4 sets of free plate armor that doesn't rust?
(don't worry bro I'm just memin ya)
>>
>>47468503
Plant Growth.
For the terrible price of some guy going abracaleafra in your fields for an hour, you double your crop yield for a whole year.

Honestly, Druids who hate civilization should spend all their time walking around farms and making everything grow great. If you only need four acres to grow food instead of eight, why are you chopping down woodland or prairie to expand your farm? When people try to push their luck and expand anyway, that's when you zap them with lightning. Make their lives not-shitty first so they're at least content, but step on them when their heads get full of it and they start trying to overreach.
>>
>>47469484
>>47469324
Turn into a CR20 creature whose CR increases when they establish a lair (I think there's some dragons who do this). Now that you're CR21, become a lich.
>>
>>47470546
Fighter and Rogue are good multiclasses for literally anyone. Action Surge and Second Wind; skill proficiencies, Expertise, and a tiny bit of additional damage.

It's really silly how good they get and make anyone right off the bat. Like, good fucking luck making your character more useful by taking three levels of fucking Wizard.
>>
>>47467149
Elf Princess Catherine the Great?
>>
>>47471816
Not in the system they aren't. 1d10 vs 2d6.
>>
>>47468303
Nobody. NOBODY, complained about the number of options, just their location and substance. A compendium or a dm with a backbone solves most problems.
>>
>>47472885
You can laugh but I actually do

I made two of them full plate and two half-plate, the full plate ones are holding halberds and the half-plate ones are holding longswords

I also gave them all some flavor text
the full plates have wolf-head visors with a terrible, unnerving snarl
The half plate ones have a pattern on the breatplate that grows more and more sinister as your gaze lingers on it
The halberds have finely carved mahogany handles that under the right light looks rotten and decayed
The swords seem translucent when looked at through a mirror

I did the same for every piece of loot in the house (I have a lot of time in my hands)
>>
>>47468328
I would say not. 3.5 suffered from trap options and character imbalance (note, this does not mean combat efficiency). 5th has mitigated these issues, but they are still a problem due to the rigidity of its few options.
>>
>>47473389
>Nobody. NOBODY, complained about the number of options

That statement is patently false, I have and still do, so do all the people I play with

In fact my group will refuse to ever again touch 3.PF
>>
>>47470947
>if you dot like it, homebrew it, after paying us $50 for the book.
>>
>>47472115
But to suggestion sets that character back. 3.5 feats where a given every other level, you don't have to stunt your class's progression because you wanted your wizard to swing a sword.
>>
>>47473541
That's why you read the PDF before you decide if you want to buy the book. It's not hard, I had it within a day of the release, same for every book after that except CoS
>>
Stupid question. Do sorcerers get extra known spells at first level from their charisma modifier?
>>
>>47473617
5e feats are much stronger than 3.5, and if you want your wizard to swing a sword there are plenty of ways to do it
>play bladesinger
>take the weapon master feat
>MC into a martial class
>play a race with weapon proficiencies

It's not hard
>>
>>47473474
Are you saying that your group doesn't play 3.5 because it has a variety of options? Or could it be that a lot of those options suck and most would rather not deal with tracking them all down.
>>
>>47473707
PHB page 101: No.
>>
>>47473725
It's one of many reasons, but it is one of them. They like knowing all the options available, 3.PF has too many to know
>>
>>47473739
Okay, just checking. This is the first time I've played a caster in 5e, and I'm torn between taking either Mage Armor or Sleep. Definitely keeping Magic Missile though,
>>
>>47473774
If you're playing draconic you don't need mage armor because you have natural AC of 13+dex

If you're playing wild mage or stormborn you do have other options
>>
>>47473719
>>47473719
>>47473719
I don't want to play a blade singer, an elf, or mc. I want a true wizard, were I get to choose my perifial options. And no, I dont want to hamper my progression (giving up 2 asi's) to swing a sword haphazardly.
>>
>>47473769
So then, it's not the number, but there location. Again, a compendium would solve this.
>>
>>47471906
Bump
>>
>>47473881
Bladesinger is a wizard school, a full true wizard that also gets to swing a sword

>But let's say that's not enough

Being an elf gives you progiciency with swords

>But you don't want to be an elf

Human variant gives you a free level 1 feat so you can take weapon master and pick 3 weapons to be proficient with

>But I'm a fucking scalie so I wanna play a dragonborn

The weapon master feat exists, and only costs 1 ASI

>But I don't want to give up ANY asi's

Take 1 level of any martial class except rogue and you get all weapon proficiencies

>but I don't want to multiclass AT ALL

Play an eldritch knight
>>
>>47473897
Liking and disliking things is subjective senpai, if you like 3.PF then play it, we don't, and much prefer 5e's approach of building the character you want to play from a comprehensive set of basic options and the ability to whip up homebrew archetypes in a few minutes
>>
>>47473881
Then be a wizard and swing a sword, just with no proficiency bonus. There is literally no penalty to it. You have to have a decent strength to do well at it, but that's just a matter character creation
>>
>>47474058
Also if you're not playing in Forgotten Realms bladesinger doesn't necessarily need to be elf exclusive
>>
How dangerous are some of the encounters in the starter set for a 3 character party? Was hoping to get some friends into D&D and thought it'd be a better place to teach them the rules than the modern campaign I'm working on.
>>
>>47474195
Pretty dangerous, if you follow the thing to the letter they will definitely die

I would strongly recommend you include an ally of some sort in the party, like a bodyguard or a friendly healer
>>
>>47474007
I don't want to traverse a labyrinth of restrictions and approximations to kinda play what I want. Only the specific option that scratches that niche will scratch that niche.
>>
>>47474058
>literary no penalty
>no proficiency bonus
Also this arguments point isn't about this specific option, but any niche option not covered by 5th.
>>
>>47474303
You have a strange definition of a labyrinth. You basically just want to be able to use a sword without investing any character resources into it. Funny enough is you could still technically do that as weapon proficiencies are listed as a possible reward for adventures in the DMs guide, but you kind of sound like a whiny faggot
>>
>>47474303
There is no labyrinth, you said "wizard that can swing a sword" and I gave you 6 ways to do it without even trying

You have no argument besides "I like the other edition better"
>>
>>47474195
They're fine, as long as your party aren't retarded. You might need to adjust some down slightly to account for a 3-man party, but that's not really difficult.

The Bugbear fight at level one can be swingy, but to be honest as long as your players aren't idiots about it and you aren't an asshole DM, you should be fine.

The Venomfang encounter - if your players even go for it - is the only one that can really be dangerous, but as long as your players don't all line up to take it in turns to swing their swords, it shouldn't be a TPK, even for a 3-man party, as long as you make sure they're aware that some fights can't be won by videogame tactics.
>>
>>47474341
Give us any example of what you mean and we will tell you exactly how to do it
>>
File: knight of fairy township amano.jpg (407KB, 998x1379px) Image search: [Google]
knight of fairy township amano.jpg
407KB, 998x1379px
thoughts on letting people take any ability from any subclass/class as a feat? the more i think about it the more i think its what i want to try running in my next campaign.

i've been trying to think of really broken combos you could do as a result... but i dont think there are really any that are too broken. also it would all be with the caveat that i would have to approve it and it would have to make sense in character.

wizard with action surge seems strong, but the opportunity cost for a 1 per short rest ability seems high.

rogue with reckless attack seems powerful, but again theres an opportunity cost there that idk if its really better than anything else.

improved divine smite or whatever the paladin ability is that lets them get +1d8 on all their attacks would probably need to be forbidden for other classes to get. paladins themselves would get some powerful combos (ie whirlwind attack, extra extra attacks, etc) but they're MAD as is so again its an opportunity cost thing.

stacking things which give +spellcasting mod to damage on spells is another thing one would need to watch for i think. but the point would be to allow character options, not allow someone to munchkin their way to +20 charisma damage on all their spells....

has anyone thought about this? i feel like you guys will just call me retarded but i also have been thinking about it a while and it feels like it opens up more cool options than it breaks things.... idk.
>>
>>47474538
I generally wouldn't do it. On a case by case if the player came to me asking if they could get an ability as a feat I'd work it out, but that's a lot of work to actually go through that all and see what works without knowing the if the players would even want to do it
>>
>>47474630
i don't even know if it would come up in game ever, maybe no one would even want to, but i think i might put it on the table for the next game i run.
>>
>>47474414
And you sound like you missed the point...
>>
>>47474341
He means no negs. Using a weapon you weren't proficient in in 3.5 put negs on your to-hit roll.
>>
>>47474538
I've been actually thinking of making some class features as feats. Any ability would definitely be broken as fuck, but taking reduced-effectiveness versions of things kinda like martial adept could work

Some of the ones I thought of:

>Roughneck:
When wearing no armor, you gain a bonus to your armor class equal to half your constitution modifier (rounded up)

>Basic Martial Arts
Not exactly sure of the details but basically gain 1 ki point and 2 monk techniques

>Basic Berserking
1 rage a day, maybe 1 level of exhaustion afterward

>Minor Portents
1/day portent but can only affect your own rolls

>Specialist
Expertise in 1 skill you are proficient with

>Minor Metamagic
1 metamagic with 1 use a day, can be taken twice

>Otherwordly Transaction
Gain 1 warlock invocation without level requirement

>Ordained
Turn undead or one channel divinity 1/day

>Animorph
Wildshape into a CR 1/8 or lower beast with no flying or swimming speed 1/day

And so on
>>
>>47474440
Why do keep going back to wizard and sword, when the original complaint was that approximating unforeseen niche options doesn't fill that gap for some players?

>>47474478
Notrhinng specific for me now. But I could point at the laundry list of prestige classes and options strewn from 2nd ed, 3.5, and 4th.

But my point is that, an abundance of options is not a bad thing, if handled well. To few options forces players to settle and approximate, even tho that specific approximation may not really scratch the specific niche they would want.
>>
>>47474676
The big thing isn't necessarily if something is OP so much as if something is too good to not take. Would every bard or sorcerer want eldritch blast with cha damage? Would every fighter want cunning action? Would every non-fighter martial ever want another extra attack or one of those cleric abilities that just give extra damage to attacks

You'd basically have to go through every class features, cross off the ones that are worth niche protection, cross off the ones that are too good, cross off the ones that are redundant with feats then decides which ones should also include ability score bonuses of 1. I'd probably recommend not giving out anything much higher than level 10 and at least and having the class level of the feature be a minimum level.
>>
>>47474692
In a system with few if any negs, not adding a your prof might as well be. Your to hit being 2-6 points under the average is "bad" which is the point.
>>
>>47474770
Neat concept, follows what they did with battle master's sup dice. But I believe that somebody already posted a set of multi class feats.
>>
>>47474779
Okay so you have two options
Wait for the options to come out or homebrew it

Don't really know what else you can do, guess you could just go and play those systems instead of coming to the 5e general and complaining about stuff nobody here can nor is interested in "fixing" because nobody thinks it's an issue

Either way, if you ever find something you really want to play and can't be done in 5e I will gladly volunteer to homebrew it myself
>>
>>47474779
It's too bad you don't have an example of it handled well huh?
>>
>>47474890
I'd love to check them out, I was thinking of putting all of these in a PDF but if someone has already done it then that's great
>>
>>47474901
I'm aware, but was only responding to the concept of "lots of options is bad". I only voice my opinion ion due to fear that the anemic trickle of material from WotC will shrink even further in the wake of DM's being unable to specify which options are on for their campaign, and players who can't live without knowing every option but simultaneously being overwhelmed.
>>
>>47474936
Fantasy craft. We need only look outside of WotC products to find simple competence.
>>
>>47475004
Design means jack shit if no one plays your game.
>>
>>47474952
Not exactly what you had posted, but I think their buried in here somewhere.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/glq8f95r7xq7nia/Compendium%3B%20Feats.docx?dl=0
>>
>>47474770
this just seems so weak i dont get why anyone would take them really.
>>47474820
>Would every bard or sorcerer want eldritch blast with cha damage?
idk would they? i don't really see this as a problem but maybe it is. though i did list stacking those kinds of abilities as a potential problem. but then you're delaying getting your casting stat up, which i think is worse than getting +charisma to your eldritch blast. not to mention bard/sorcerer cant just get eldritch blast on their own (well, bard can with magical secrets but i think thats a waste personally), so they would need to either multi or take yet another feat to get that. but i've never understood the internets obsession with eldritch blast. its powerful but i don't think its a problem.
>Would every fighter want cunning action?
this is potentially dangerous, but again it comes at an opportunity cost that im not sure if it would really be that much of a problem. and keep in mind im discussing this for one table, not as a game design in general thing.
>Would every non-fighter martial ever want another extra attack or one of those cleric abilities that just give extra damage to attacks
the cleric abilities only work on one attack per turn. extra extra attacks are good. maybe they would. would the campaign even get to 12? (level 11 to unlock extra attack 2, level 12 to get another ASI). this does make me curious to run the numbers on a barbarian getting another extra attack versus a vanilla fighter. keep in mind most (all?) martial characters are MAD except the fighter, so again its at an opportunity cost that perhaps they would all want. but again its for one table, so we're talking about 1, maybe 2 characters taking that at a level that idk if the campaign would even get to. and even then i'm not sure if its always the optimal choice or not for your third (only you third!) ASI.
>>
>>47475016
Yes, we all know the meme. I'm just proposing an alternative to option fear mongering. It's the players after all that swayed the devs to lessen the influx of material. We should instead demand better material, not less bad material.
>>
>>47474779
Don't compare a new game to one at the end of it's cycle, perhaps? Of course there's less options, there's TWO player books out and a handful of UA.
>>
>>47474975
And I disagree with your opinion and hope the "options" released are as few and far between as possible, but since neither of our opinions matter why are we even talking about it? Most likely things will stay as they are, 2016 will see little to no releases and then somewhere between August and christmas 2017 we'll see the player's handbook 2 or Eberron Adventurer's Guide with a few extra races and whatnot
>>
>>47474936
Fuck you! 4th ed's rule compendium, was in point. And their online compendium would have been a revolution.
>>
>>47472997
It's a shame those classes aren't good enough to only take levels in them.
>>
>>47475081
I don't feel a 2 year old edition is still new. And we can compare the release cycles, how much material did 3.P-4th have out at this stage?
>>
>>47475030
>this just seems so weak i dont get why anyone would take them really

Plenty of people like and take martial adept, and it's pretty much on the same level as these
Giving out class features without a tradeoff would be too powerful, you might as well gestalt
>>
>>47475120
Is this bait?

>>47475121
Why would you do that? What is the point? I don't understand what comparing 5e to other editions and bitching incessantly on a Nubian wood carving site is supposed to achieve other than annoying the people who legitimately enjoy the general's subject matter
>>
>>47475120
They're great if you just want to fight shit.
Not if you want to be useful out of combat, though.

>>47475214
Obviously.
>>
>>47475028
All of the additions are way too strong to be feats in my opinion, but with some tweaking it could be balanced

I liked some of the changes to existing feats like keen mind and grappler though
>>
>>47475214
I was commenting on how 5th Ed has lost its new car smell. You can't make a false claim about something and then when corrected, tell that person to leave because it dispels your illusion. I play 5th primarily, and have a right to want my system of choice to follow what I consider a better design path. It's my opinion, and if you prefer less options then I'll discuss my view point with you
>>
>>47468641
>>47472900
>increasing crop yields when you could just obsolete farming with Goodberry
>>
>>47470831

>cast darkness on enemy
>shadowstep behind him
>hope he doesn't walk out of the sphere of darkness before next turn so you can unsheathe your short sword and shank him
>>
>>47475314
Yeah, it seems they were all placed on par with GWM, PaM and such. I use them in my games, but my group focuses more on out of combat shenanigans.
>>
>>47475226
The problem with the "useful outside of combat" features these classes get is that people are constantly saying they suck

Mastermind rogues are amazing outside of combat, as are many of the champion, battlemaster and assassin's more overlooked features

Ranger's too for that matter
>>
>>47469774
I think with the tokens you're thinking of the 4e box.
>>
>>47470859

Can you use battle master maneuvers on spell attacks? I know that you don't have to use the light beam thingy, but it's basically sun soul's big thing. It's also pretty Ki intensive with it's AOEs so losing out on 3 ki might be kinda a big deal.

Sun Soul isn't bad but compared to Shadow and Open Hand it's a little lack luster imo.
>>
>>47475437
You can cast darkness on something the enemy is wearing
>>
>>47471725

if you do this make sure to bump up humans a tad. they're pretty much unplayable otherwise.
>>
>>47475030
>this just seems so weak i dont get why anyone would take them really.
Roughneck seems really good for Barbarians and okay for Monks / casters.
>>
>>47475495
Hey, I had a regular human once.
Used the +1 to all to boost every stat to 14 or higher, with 3 16s and a 19. it was great.
>>
>>47475490

sure, that works

unfortunately, without action surge you can't be quite as edgy as you want to be, and cut him down before he reacts. Guess you gotta set up the darkness before hand.

Can you even teleport into or out of your darkness sphere? It mentions "that you can see" and you certainly can't see out of your sphere of darkness, and you can't really see into it either. Teleporting out seems like a big "no", unless you just barely poke your eyes out so you're still in the dark. Teleporting in is a little iffy too.
>>
>>47475544

Sure, but the feat would have almost certainly served you better (and the fact that you rolled well helps too). Any other race would have worked better too. You might not have had 14s across the board but you could start with a 20 in your main stat and call it a day anyways. Base human is not that great, especially compared to some of the great racial features every other race gets.
>>
>>47475547
>and you certainly can't see out of your sphere of darkness, and you can't really see into it either.
Yes you can, that's the whole fucking point of multiclassing into Warlock.
>>
>>47475603

i was talking about a pure monk specifically.

the first post mentions that but it doesn't seem like the reply is specifically about the gish either way, no need to be so hostile anon
>>
>>47475461
Theyr'e really not.

>Mastermind
Probably the closest to having real out of combat utility, and still nothing that magic couldn't replicate.
>Master of Intrigue
Pretty much the Assassin's Imposter and/or the Actor feat, so anyone could get this. They all give you no benefit a DM wouldn't let you roleplay when appropriate to begin with and could be covered by simple Deception and Perception checks. This is a basic character trait that could fit on any class that has been shoehorned into a class ability; you may as well make a Fighter archetype that allows you to brew beer. technically battlemaster does that
>Insightful Manipulator
A mental-oriented and less indepth version of Battlemaster's Know Your Enemy. Still keyed to mechanics. Only really gives you an impression on the relative difficulty of fooling or influencing someone, doesn't actually make it possible to begin with. Can be completely roleplayed out without this mechanic.
>Soul of Deceit
Hey, something useful. In an edge case. Once you're 17.

>Champion
Absolutely pathetic.
>Remarkable Athlete
You can roll slightly better. Only lets you do things mechanics already cover. Bard already does this better.
Also lets you jump an extra five feet at best. Wow. Incredible. And that's if you assume it ADDS five feet of speed, because you're already using all of your 30 movement on a 10 foot run and 20 foot jump to begin with.

>Battlemaster
>Know Your Enemy
See Insightful Manipulator. This version is merely a way to determine stuff that most DMs would let you establish to begin with ("how physically strong does this guy look? what armor is he wearing" aren't really novel questions).

>Ranger
Man, we've been ripping on Rangers for more than a year now even before this whole martial v. caster fight started.

None of this isn't already covered by good RP and a DM that isn't a raging faggot.
>>
>>47475544
+1 to every stat is pretty bad when most classes need 3 stats at the most, and every other race gives at least a +2 +1 on top of other features. Non-variant humans really should have gotten extra skill proficiencies or something
>>
>>47475547
Devil's sight
>>
>>47475661
And including Barbarians in the mix, they're the martial class who would really have the most utility, what with lifting a lot of stuff, seeing far, tracking, and stealthing. But those are mutually exclusive. There's also the apparently reviled "fly speed equal to your walking speed" they get at 14 that some people find ridiculous, even though it's obviously just jumping since you fall every turn.

That archetype is also magical, so.
>>
File: 50131276_p0.png (270KB, 709x678px) Image search: [Google]
50131276_p0.png
270KB, 709x678px
>>47475520
i just think he wrote it out wrong, i doubt that was his intention
>>47475165
>Giving out class features without a tradeoff would be too powerful,
well the tradeoff is losing an ASI to gain one ability.
>you might as well gestalt
perhaps thats what im moving towards idk. i did think about this is a 5e gestalt analog (though it isn't that).
>>
>>47475415
Have you considered making open gaming license content and house ruling a lot until official items that you like are released?
>>
>>47475724
If it doesn't stack with other AC bonuses it's complete garbage; if it does it's giving you +1 to +3 to AC which seems okay. It's certainly better than Medium Armour Master's +1 AC for two ASIs.
>>
>>47474770
>>Basic Martial Arts
What's a monk technique?
>>
>>47475820
It was probably meant to be a worse cheaper alternative to levels in barbarian, but only the guy who posted that really knows
>>
>>47475724
Most class features are much stronger than any feat
>>
So I'm a level 9 Arcan Trickster Rogue.
I have 20 in Dex and 16 in Int.
Should I dump the rest of my ASIs into Int or pick up feats?
What feats are best for an Arcane Trickster?
>>
>>47475839
If it set your AC to [half con mod] + 10 + Dex then it's almost completely pointless compared to wearing Light Armour. If it adds to your AC then it is probably worth considering for any unarmoured character. Of course, it'd be most popular for Barbarians, ironically.
>>
>>47475917
Either way I've never been a fan of using half ability scores. If you want a smaller number than an ability score you should just give a static one.
>>
>>47475822
Open hand technique? I'm not super familiar with monk

>>47475839
Pretty much my intention, you'd get a slightly worse unarmored defense, not supposed to stack

Straight up giving unarmored defense just seems to me like it cheapens monk and barb, if you notice all the proposed feats are slightly worse than their feature equivalents, because you can get them without paying the MC tax
>>
>>47475906


depending on how many spells with saving throws you use Int can either be kind of important to not important at all. You can grab at least a feat or two and still pump it a bit, however, and 18 Int would probably be nice.

Mobile is a nice feat for Rogues specifically imo, Magic Initiate for more cantrips and a free level 1 spell slot. Lucky is always useful, and Resilient (Con) lets you have 3 proficient strong saving throws. Those 4 are the best ones I can think of off the top of my head.
>>
>>47475956
Good point, maybe just make it AC when not wearing armor be 12+Dex

Not 13 because draconic ancestry sorcerers would be cheapened, again, I don't like taking uniqueness from classes

But it would basically mean your skin is as tough as studded leather, and I think that's pretty cool
>>
File: angel_aasimar.jpg (68KB, 596x1000px) Image search: [Google]
angel_aasimar.jpg
68KB, 596x1000px
I want to take a different approach to clerics.

In regards to my setting, the idea of these militant warrior-priests who summon divine power nearly at a whim is too over the top. To knit wounds closed with a gesture, to expunge disease without medicine, to cure the blind and the deaf- these are miracles, and I feel are trivialized by how they're thrown about in D&D.

How should I go about altering the cleric to fit the vision I have for them in my campaign? They're living saints, given power by the will of the gods themselves, who some believe don't even exist because of how little they interact with the world. There are a handful of them across the entire globe- there is no formal "faith militant" order to arm and train them, only their divine gifts and the guidance they're given from the god that empowers them. Their gifts would surely cause a cult of personality to develop around them, and their insights would be treated as gospel or the direst of heresies.

Would their powers be based from Charisma or Wisdom? Should I allow the player to choose at creation? What should I allow for to counter their lack of heavy armor and weapons training? I'm fond of Pathfinder's Oracle in theme, but I don't feel that giving them a curse is necessary (although it could be offered as an option).
>>
>>47476055
have you heard of the Favored Soul from 3.5?
>>
File: fucking bored.jpg (5KB, 275x183px) Image search: [Google]
fucking bored.jpg
5KB, 275x183px
>Druid summons fucking millions of panthers
>The game now consists of one guy rolling for panthers for half an hour each cycle
>Everyone else's face during all those fucking turns
>>
>>47476055
So, how Clerics used to be before 3.X put them in literally every village and party and they all had heavy armor proficiency and ran around self-buffing to club dudes' heads open.
>>
>>47476055
Something I've strongly considered to make Clerics fit a more divine theme is to add caveats to most of their miraculous spells-

If the receiver of the magic is seen as 'unworthy' to their god, it doesn't work. Blind man is a sinner? No sight for you. Went on pilgrimage in the last year? New fingers for you.
>>
>>47476055
I would say keep everything the same but change the melee focused stuff like weapon and armor proficiencies and hit-effects to approproately caster-y stuff

Maybe give them a sort of "divine recovery" for instance
>>
>>47476055
>Would their powers be based from Charisma or Wisdom?
Keep it Wisdom, if only because the last thing 5e needs is another Charisma caster unless you make Warlocks Intelligence-based as a tradeoff.

>What should I allow for to counter their lack of heavy armor and weapons training?
Some of the attack cantrips that sorcerers, wizards, and warlocks get.
>>
>>47475791
I do both. I have a heavy home brewed game and am waiting for more options. But games outside my circle are always limited by what's current.

I myself enjoy hunting through splats, but realize that others may feel different.
>>
>>47476036
I get where you're coming from, but any class that doesn't have light armor proficiency has something that gives them 13 ac for at least 8 hours. There's basically no purpose to that if you don't make it at least 13+dex (also I think there's an invocation that does that anyway, which someone could pick with a different feat you put in that list)

"Con mod up to 3" or something could also potentially work, but I just would do the wisdom one instead of con personally. Every character wants con, but wisdom is more out of the way so it's easier to justify not having a cap. It also doesn't allow you to use shields like the barbarian unarmed defense so there's still reasons to multiclass into barbarian instead of just picking the feat
>>
>>47475966
>Pretty much my intention, you'd get a slightly worse unarmored defense, not supposed to stack

You'd get a completely pointless feature when people could just Magic Initiate for Mage Armour or wear Light Armour instead.
>>
>>47476094
"Sorry, the Plane of Panthers is fresh out."
And then you kill him.
>>
>>47476094
Multi-monster summoning magic was a mistake.
>>
>>47476036

Who would use it though? Wizards mage armor is already better, and it's not like they're hurting for 1st levels either. Sorcs could use it if they're not draconic ancestry...but I think they also get Mage Armor.

Monks and Barbarians obviously have better things to do with their better features too.
>>
>>47476103
What a great way to make your party hate you
>>
>>47476115
>>47476119
>>47476135
I had it in mind as more of an option to fall back on if you ended up unarmored and weren't a wizard, or more of a "concealed defense" kind of deal, a way for classes that don't normally get unarmored defense to have access to something similar without having to multiclass or use magic

I guess it is weak, I still like it thematically, but that's the beauty of feats, they're entirelt optional
>>
>>47476115
>>47476119
>>47476135
I had it in mind as more of an option to fall back on if you ended up unarmored and weren't a wizard, or more of a "concealed defense" kind of deal, a way for classes that don't normally get unarmored defense to have access to something similar without having to multiclass or use magic

I guess it is weak, I still like it thematically, but that's the beauty of feats, they're entirely optional
>>
Anybody else think counterspell and dispel magic should be 1st level spells?
>>
>>47476094
Everytime.
Why. So fucking lame.
>>
>>47476197
I'm getting tired of the "its optional so it's ok if it's bad" approach in d&d.
>>
>>47476298
It's homebrew too, you're more than welcome to ignore it famalam

This is my hobby, not my job
>>
>>47475030
>not to mention bard/sorcerer cant just get eldritch blast on their own

Magic Initiate: Warlock?
>>
>>47476133
Single monster summoning magic was also a mistake.
>summoning another Fighter
>>
>>47476343
This is exactly what a Sorcerer in my party did. He grabbed Eldritch Blast and Hellish Rebuke. Quickened Spell for double Eldritch Blasts all day? G-fucking-G.
>>
Is it considered poor form to have monsters buff themselves before rolling initiative?
>>
>>47476431
Much better than the faggots that take a two level dip in Warlock.
>>
>>47476094
Yeah, had a similar experience lately.
From now on I dont think I'm going to allow it because it's flat out no fucking fun for anyone but the summoner.
>>
>>47476431
Hex would've been better I think. Combined with Eldritch Blast or Scorching Ray, it's absolutely horrifying.
>9d6 damage at level 3.
Good thing there's no Necrotic-based dragons.
>>
>>47476055
On a semi related note, I had an idea for a divine caster class about Miracle Working sort of Archivist that functions by recreating a story from their sacred texts.

Essentially you would have a long list of Miracles you had learned but in order to bring them about, you had to carry out the major plot points of a story over several rounds. It was vaguely inspired by how Miracles are performed in the Dark Souls universe in the Lore. Functionally it would be a caster with spells cast over several rounds for a very powerful effect or a slowly building one.
>>
>>47476531
Hex is Concentration though, and he had Twin Spell so he could buff the frontliners with Haste or Invisibility.
>>
>>47476589
Ah. Fair enough.
>>
>>47476445
Probably. If you're talking about something like a spell with an 8 hour duration then it's fine. If you're talking about them having some sort of meta-time to freely spend actions to buff themselves before the party attacks them then, it's less poor form more complete bullshit.

If the villain is just casting shit while monologing and the party doesn't have the good sense to attack I'd blame the party though
>>
>>47476653
It's more along the lines of a raiding party with a priestess casting Bless and maybe Spiritual Weapon the moment before they begin their attack.
>>
>>47476683
Why wouldn't they? Many creatures aren't stupid. It's one thing to say they come in unbuffed, but if they're distant enough that no one would notice these spells, go nuts.
>>
>>47476653
>If the villain is just casting shit while monologing and the party doesn't have the good sense to attack I'd blame the party though
Or they've been conditioned not to interrupt the GM when he's got his dick in his hand.
>>
>>47471906
>>47473900
Bump.
>>
>>47476706
As I said, it might be considered poor form, and I don't want my players crying about how it's "unfair".
>>
>>47476683
Can the party also cast buff spells on each other before combat starts? What about everyone else, can they forego the buffing and use this pre-combat time to make an attack?
>>
>>47476782
I was going to allow them time to set up traps and arbalests. They'd only get to buff themselves beforehand if they mention it.
>>
File: image.jpg (94KB, 500x637px) Image search: [Google]
image.jpg
94KB, 500x637px
So I wanna make a cool ass spear user, like pic-related. How do I go about this? Fighter? Paladin? Storm cleric?
>>
>>47476871
Are you going to mention that they are allowed to do that or will it be a secret rule that only you know about and it's all up to them to figure out it exists?
>>
>>47476899
>Storm Cleric
>Take a majority of lighting-based spells
>ask DM to work with you to get a spear with lightning enchant
>convince someone to play a fat fighter with bronze-colored plate mail
>???
>Adventure
>>
>>47476934
Of course not. It's up to them to think "oh hey these guys are pretty far away but will be here in a second, can i buff?"
>>
I'm working on homebrewing up an adventure, and im working on mapping the towns.
What does every town need to function?
The town is fairly small, but is big enough to have a mayor
>>
>>47477153
>Water/Food
Irrigation, be it a well or river or something. Farmlands is an easy choice, typically surrounding the area.
>Economy
Some sort of marketplace, both for local and foreign sales.
>Security
This isn't absolutely necessary but should exist in some form, from actual guards to a coalition of farmers
>Recreation
Tavern(s), festivals, houses of pleasure, etc. Depends on the flavor you're going for.
>>
>>47477021
>giving enemies the chance to buff themselves
>without giving the players any indication they can do the same
555-Come-On-Now

>>47477153
A tavern, a mill, a blacksmith, couple farms, probably a tanner, a temple, and a market. Depending on where the town is it might have more, but that's a solid base.
>>
>>47477203
>festivals
Sure! Just invite horribleness to your town!
>>
>>47477232
Have you ever been to a festival, anon?
>>
>>47477210
The players should be expected to prepare accordingly of their own volition. When you start telling the players when they can do things, you're stealing their autonomy.
>>
>>47477270
Yeah. And a portal to hell was opened by a dracolich's cult.
>>
>>47477290
I mean in real life. Festivals are fun occasions.
>>
>>47477307
They're fine in real life. They're practical death sentences in D&D.
>>
>>47477273
I'm not saying you tell them when to buff like "Okay, this is your buff period", I'm saying make it clear that when you're not in an ambush situation the enemies will be buffing themselves so the PCs know they have the option to do it themselves if they choose.

If you're having enemies prebuff themselves in an ambush situation that's just being a dick.
>>
>>47477273
There's a huge difference between telling the players to do something and letting the players know they can do something. They can't pursue an option if they aren't aware it exists and if you're making shit up it's your duty to make sure everyone fully understands the rules you've set in place.
>>
>>47469657
Did you make those pieces yourself?
Or purchase them premade?
>>
>>47476343
not be an ass but did you notice where i said right after that that they would need to take another feat or multiclass to get it?
>>
File: mqdefault.jpg (18KB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]
mqdefault.jpg
18KB, 320x180px
>>47468024
That's a knechts kriegsmesser, lad.
>>
>>47468024
That's an extra-long machete.
>>
>>47468024
its a war pick
>>
>>47468024
That's clearly plastic.
>>
>>47476954
>>47476899

Elemental weapon seems cool. I'd definitely use the stats for a pike. See if your DM will let you use polearm master with it, maybe take levels in Fighter.

Great Weapon Master and fighter seem solid.
>>
>>47467121
>>47467121
I gave my players a Bag of Tricks, an item that lets you summon random animals 3 times per day. Then before I knew it, they decided to make a street performance:
>Bard singing and playing
>Cleric using Thaumaturgy for drums and special effects
>Rogue passing the hat along the crowd
>Wizard threw a fuzzy ball from the Bag of Tricks and got a lion
>Fighter and lion fake-wrestling and doing cool stuff in rhythm with the music

It was a lot of fun.
>>
What kind of features should a bard have if I were to make it a half-caster?

The key one where I'm having trouble is a non-spell usage for spell slots, like the paladin's Smite and the ranger's Primeval Awareness. I don't think it should be a bonus to ability checks, since that's redundant with Bardic Inspiration, but I don't have any other ideas.
>>
>>47479366
Why would you make bards half casters?

Just make a skald class, but don't try to ruin the bard, this is only the second edition where they aren't shit
>>
>>47479366
to start with, extra hit die, then some sort of way to use their spells when attacking that doesn't conflict with the bonus actions from bardic inspiration. Extra attack and better weapon profeciencies too. You would also need to completely redesign their archetypes, since lore focuses on stealing the high level spells that you don't have access to anymore, and valor bards features are going to look kind of wierd when you have already given them to the base class.

Maybe you could have Bardic Oaths for the archetypes? For what kind of music you play and why...

OH WAIT, I AM DESCRIBING A PALADIN, the cha based half caster that we already have.

If you want a bard with half casting, my advice to you is to make a paladin with the bards spell list, and giving it all the bardic inspiration abilities instead of an archetype (placed at appropriate levels, of course)
>>
bear traps good combat strat right
>>
If you wanted a sword made of stone, would you need it to be magic to keep it from breaking?
>>
>>47480320
After rereading the Hunting Trap I am a little confused, what counts as the action for it, and what counts as stepping on it?

This shit seems really up to the DM. Yes, it may take an action to set the trap, but it could take several minutes to chain it up to something immobile in the area (or at least another action to hammer in pitons). Furthermore, it doesn't say what counts as stepping on the trap. Even while being incredibly generous and saying that the trap somehow encompasses a whole five foot square, enemies can simply leap over it. Jumping requires no action, it is merely part of movement, and any creature with 5 str and a 10 ft headstart can completely bypass the area. Without the headstart, you only need 10 str, something most enemies will have anyway.

That being said, if you have some way of forcing an enemy to be in a certain square to attack your party so he hits the trap when he stops to attack or whatever, it could be worthwhile.
>>
>>47480465
well d&d has always had "magic" alt materials in existence like ironwood. so you could always make up some non magical stone that grows into shapes dwarves make molds for, or something retarded like that
real magic spells are obviously the easiest way though and are in the rules already. stone shape specifically mentions weapons as well
>>
File: they took it.jpg (132KB, 1649x931px) Image search: [Google]
they took it.jpg
132KB, 1649x931px
>>47480573
>>
>>47480682
Even if it was intended to be bait, aside from whether or not it just takes one action to tether the trap its mostly useless.

If I were DMing a game with fasthands thieves I would just give it to them, assuming they can find a way to force an enemy into the square.
>>
File: 5e_EE_Spells_Booming-Blade2.png (25KB, 481x494px) Image search: [Google]
5e_EE_Spells_Booming-Blade2.png
25KB, 481x494px
>>47471903
>Warcaster / Booming Blade / Command

I don't even know where to start in telling you how wrong you are. I'll make it short:
>booming blade requires the target to be willing to move; if they're commanded to move against their will, then the spell's condition isn't met
>booming blade and command are both 1 action spells so I don't know how you think you're casting them both on the same turn (is there a paladin/cleric feature that allows it? if so, my bad, I havent read those classes yet)
>you don't need warcaster to cast booming blade OR command; booming blade only needs verbal and a weapon attack and command only requires verbal
>>
What's a fun healer to play? I'm pretty new to 5e, joining a new campaign with a bunch of more experienced guys. One's playing a bard but he said he was gonna be more focused on combat and utility stuff than healing, and the other two are a monk and a chainlock.

I was thinking of being a healer, but I don't wanna get stuck just healing.
>>
>>47481868
be a druid and force berries down everyones throat
>>
Okay Anons. I'm running Princes of the Apocalypse and its going pretty fantastically so far. Everyone is loving it and the encounters are really well designed as is the general sandboxy-ness of it. I have a few questions though. My party being the crafty little buggers that they are promptly took out feathergale spire then, after reading the note about the sacred stone monstary went there. One of the pc's a warlock, used illusions to pretend to be a black earth cultist when they got there (he guessed what they looked like from bodies in a grave he found). Some good diplomacy and deception and a dead umberhulk later they bypassed the entirety of the sacred stone monastery and are now basically trapped in the temple of the black earth. Thing is, they're only level 4. One of my big questions is are they screwed? reading through it, I feel like if they managed things really carefully they could probably survive and maybe even conquer the temple but i'm still a bit worried because the adventure recommends visiting other places first. a lot of other places.
>>
>>47476270
>no fuck that magic effect for just a measely 1st levell spell slot
kinda trivializes nasty magical stuff if the party can just check a slot box without a care in the world every time
>>
>>47479296
Given a bag with tiny fuzzy balls
>Cast Identify
>"It's just a bag"
>summons a mouse by removing a thing

>realize after reading your post that it was a bag of tricks
>i was given no indication that it recharges
fuck he was such a bad gm
>>
>>47482214
Nah, as is Counterspell battles are pretty fucking retarded because of how the action economy works (if you want to counterspell anything other than counterspell, you are pretty much fucked by the other caster casting counterspell)

Since most mage NPCs don't have to ration their spells per day out between encounters, its almost always shit to counterspell as a PC (except when counterspelling a counterspell, or when for some reason the enemy spell caster doesn't have access to the spell).

No need to make this problem any worse.
>>
>>47480573
>>47480775
Not every creature will know what a hunting trap is: most beasts, monstrosities, oozes, etc for example. Even low int humanoids who would never have seen something like it before. Also you can drag creatures onto it with grappling or use spells like Gust, Lightning Lure to force them onto it.
>>
>>47472095
Don't be a faggot, anon. There are only so many things you can do mechanically to differentiate characters in 5e.
>>
Asking since people here would probably know best:
Is there any class similar to an Arcane Trickster in 4th Edition? It's fine If I have to swap Ability scores around because of the way 4th edition works with Int/AC and having to either take a feat to use dex for attacks, I can deal with Strength.
Or group is kind of taking a break with 5e while the main DM is out+we're wanting to just change it up a little, and my FLGS is awful and doesn't want to play anything but specifically editions of D&D or pathfinder over 3.X

Basically seeing if anyone here has played 4e enough and looked at AT enough to tell me if there's a style of mainly maneuverable Slashy/Stabby class, with some magic thrown in, rather than magic being the focus with melee slapped on.
>>
>>47482353
>the gelatinous cube steps on the trap
> you now have an armed beartrap in the cube
>>
>>47482485
That's a glorious idea actually.

But there are oozes that are like, stone ooze or something right?
>>
>>47482353
>oozes
Kek, similarly to how some things may or may not know about traps(which seems retarded, since this is D&D and everything, including the animals you face, seem to know enough to stay away from the pointy bits of your weapon, and use their dexterity to dodge things from complicated mechanisms like crossbows), many creatures unique anatomy would stop them from being stuck. Grappling would not work. RAW, when you move a grappled creature with you, they are WITH YOU. Same square. That means you would be triggering the trap.

If you are talking about using spells and cooperating with your allies, using the shove action and stuff just to get the hunting trap to work?

Hell yeah I'm fine with that, it seems cool as hell. This seems right in the spirit of my D&D, and the payoff for your party working together to get someone stuck in the beartrap seems right where it should be.
>>
So I've been out of DnD for a while now, used to mostly play pathfinder and 3.5. is there anything drastically different between those and 5e?
>>
>>47482412
Paladin is probably your best bet for melee with some magic, Eldritch Knight is great at high levels too. Dex paladins are actually really good and play a lot like the avengers from 4E.
>>
>>47482638
Man, maybe we really do need a FAQ. This question gets asked all the time, and it's not that easy to answer in-depth.

The simplest way to state it is that 5e is a much more streamlined system with an emphasis on faster play and character story vs. character builds and power levels.
>>
>>47482687
I'm actually asking the reverse of what you're saying, sorry, guess I wasn't really clear on that.

I'm playing an AT in 5th, and looking for 4th edition classes that would be similar, because my group is weird.
>>
>>47482638
Bounded accuracy, concentration, advantage/disadvantage and a step away from the character "deckbuilding" of 3.pf are the biggest differences between the editions. CoDzilla is less of a thing because of concentration (and the lack of save or dies and a lower amount of spell slots). Bounded accuracy means stats are capped at 20, and the bonus for a proficient level 20 character in a given skill or weapon is capped at +6. Together this means (although there are some exceptions) that even the biggest badass won't get beyond a result of 31 when rolling a d20 (and why yes, this DOES make mooks significantly more powerful).

There are less options, but its also nearly impossible to build a character "wrong". Even the weakest options for characters won't do much than put you behind a "powergamer" just a few points in damage.
>>
>>47476055
Maybe you shouldn't play D&D my man, since miraculous shit is part for the course with arcane or divine magic.

Also, literally everything you said is fluff based and doesn't even conflict with the current Cleric setup outside of losing weapon/armor proficiencies.
>>
>>47482638
There's a lot of little things that really throw vets for a loop, specifically with spells. Pretty much every spell got touched up, so don't assume too much.
>>
>>47482633
Mind showing me where it's written that grapplers occupy the same space as their grappled target? Nothing that suggests that in the Grappling section.
>>
>>47482778
As a powergamer, I can tell you that last part is a bald faced lie. You can obviate a lot of things with smart build choices and full casters are still better than non-casters. The thing is there are more classes that get some kind of magic and it's a lot harder to fuck up being an average character.

The long and short is this: 5e is a cut down 3.X/OSR mashup with simplified mechanics and much less material to have to worry about.

>>47482755
Melee Ranger or a Chargelock would probably be your best bet. Maaaaaybe a Monk with Desert Wind and Starblade Flurry.
>>
>>47482911
>When you move, you carry the grappled target with you

Are you implying all of the gear that you are carrying with you occupies another square than you do?

You carry the grappled creature with you, a floating spectral hand doesn't compel them to follow you. You have to be touching them in some way. Either you are in their square or they are in yours. Either way you are in the same square when the trap goes off.
>>
>>47482633
Nah, my man, you have no clue how 5e grappling works

See >>47482911, a player can absolutely grapple a motherfucker and place them directly over a hunting trap/brazier/bottomless pit
>>
>>47482942
>melee ranger
Huh, alright. I actually somewhat drew up a character sheet for that just as a test, shouldn't be too hard to change the race/ability scores.
Thanks, man.
What exactly is a chargelock?
>>
>>47482945
>DRAG

Don't be willfully ignorant, it just makes you look like an idiot
>>
>>47482942
I did say "nearly impossible" you could make a charisma boosting beast master ranger that chooses fucking awful feats like savage attacker or something and you would definitely be behind an optimised battlemaster more than a few points. But you would have to really try to make something awful, its not something that will happen on accident like in 3.pf
>>
>>47482945
Except you quoted it incorrectly
>When you move, you can drag or carry the grappled creature with you
If your strength can support carrying it, it seems you can carry it and share a space with it but it also says you can drag. So you're grasping their forearm for example and dragging them with you.
>>
>>47482942
>As a powergamer
>full casters are still better than non-casters

Confirmed for no clue what he's talking about

Fighters and barbarians are kings of DPR in 5e
Paladins and rogues are kings of burst
Casters are *pretty good*
>>
>>47482984
Way to ignore the rest of my post. What are you dragging that character with? A free hand right? The free hand, that is a part of you, right? Last I checked your body parts only occupy squares that you don't if they have been detached. You are in their square, or they are in yours. one way or another anon.

Since I am using plain english to prove my point, and it doesn't explicitly say that they occupy a different square, why don't you tell me where it says that they do occupy different spaces.

And more relevant to the point, even if they were in a different square, what makes you think you get to choose which one? Sure it would have to be adjacent to you, but I DEFINITELY don't see where you get to choose which square they occupy.
>>
File: trailerparkdrive.gif (3MB, 240x135px) Image search: [Google]
trailerparkdrive.gif
3MB, 240x135px
>>47482778
>mfw this entire post

>There are less options, but its also nearly impossible to build a character "wrong"

Oh god, yes there is. You take the wrong levels at the wrong time, pick the wrong spells, background or feats and your build can fall flat on it's ass.
Most people are just total scrubs at 5E still, even if they play it all the time.

> Bounded accuracy means stats are capped at 20

Stats are NOT CAPPED AT 20, but most ability score increases are limited to 20. There are quite a few magic items, boons and features that bypass it.

I feel like no one ever reads the DMG.
>>
>>47483069
I literally said that there were exceptions to the bounded accuracy, and nearly impossible is not the same as impossible. If you try to fuck yourself I am sure you will succeed.
>>
>>47483034
>barbarians
>top DPR

There's something seriously wrong with your party if a straight barbarian is top DPR.
>>
>>47483034
>rogues are kings of burst
-This-
Every single time I land a SA it feels fantastic.
The fact that if someone tries to get away from me I can just opportunity attack to get another is even better.
And pallys have smites and a bunch of neat little tricks they can do to shit out damage, more if they specialize for burst, enough said.
>>
>>47483069
>take the wrong background
That's hilarious. Please, go on.
>>
>>47483054
>I'm an assblasted, angry retard! Please indulge me.

Nope, you're very obviously incorrect and unintelligent. Not even going to argue with your dumb ass.

>>47483117
>There's something seriously wrong with your party if a straight barbarian is top DPR.
Not him, but Barb's are pretty good. They get their rage bonus damage, reckless attack advantage, brutal critical (which can be further exacerbated by half-orcing). Can pretty easily by a hard-hitter.
>>
File: 1455238837522.jpg (26KB, 379x214px) Image search: [Google]
1455238837522.jpg
26KB, 379x214px
>>47482942
>powergamer
Anon, I kind of hate you.
>>
File: Screenshot_2016-05-28-02-02-59-1.png (121KB, 1193x208px) Image search: [Google]
Screenshot_2016-05-28-02-02-59-1.png
121KB, 1193x208px
>>47483054
Pretty explicit
>>
>>47483129
Go thief, use fast hands to throw/splash acid/fire/holy water/oil attacks.
If it hits, use your action to ready an attack. Just make sure you think of a good trigger.

This is all legal. Enjoy two SAs per round without praying for opportunity attacks.
>>
>>47483194
>This is all legal.
since when are acid/fire/holy water/oil bottles finesse weapons?
>>
>>47483214
You can get SAs on improvised ranged weapon attacks.
>>
>>47483194
>>47483242
Improvised weapons do not have the finesse property and are not ranged weapons (and no, throwing them does not make them a ranged weapon). Sneak attack does not apply.
>>
>>47483259
First you don't believe that SA can be gained from ranged attacks, now you believe improvised weapons aren't weapons at all. Maybe you should try reading the book, instead depending on your table to spoon feed you.
>>
>>47483242
Acid vials are not ranged weapons, they are *treated as* improvised thrown weapons

If they were actual weapons they would get a damage bonus from your STR
>>
>>47483191
wow, that "willingly" line
almost like it wouldn't apply to a grappled creature
>>
File: 5e sneak attack.png (110KB, 352x118px) Image search: [Google]
5e sneak attack.png
110KB, 352x118px
>>47483345
Sneak Attack can only be made with finesse weapons and ranged weapons.

Improvised weapons are neither.

Maybe you should try reading the book.
>>
>>47483242

This >>47483346 . They're objects; if they were weapons, they'd be in the weapon category. Sneak attack requires a weapon attack
>>
>>47483345
Not him but see >>47483346
If you were to throw an empty bottle you would be making an attack with an improvised weapon and would get sneak attack
If you are using an acid vial you are using an item following specific rules, and specific overrides general
>>
>>47483378
thrown weapon != ranged weapon; just look at the weapons table; handaxes and whatnot are Thrown but they aren't Ranged.

Furthermore, you're using fast hands to Use an Object which, by definition, is not an attack, and thus cannot qualify for the "make an attack" clause of sneak attack.

one more dumb/intentionally ignorant argument out of you and you'll be talking to yourself.
>>
>>47483345
>First you don't believe that SA can be gained from ranged attacks
I just didn't type the word ranged, nobody said shit about ranged attacks not giving SA.
I specifically -didn't- type ranged because the book specifies ranged weapons, ie something that can be fired from range.
Book also specifies finesse weapons, which is why daggers count for the purposes of SA, while hand-axes would not.
>>
>>47483428
>you're using fast hands to Use an Object which, by definition, is not an attack, and thus cannot qualify for the "make an attack" clause of sneak attack.
Use an Object is "When an object requires your action for its use, you take the Use an Object action," so stuff like oil and alchemist's fire are covered under it quite explicitly. Fast Hands lets you use such objects as a bonus action, so you can feasibly make an attack with Use an Object.

The attacks that those involve don't work with sneak attack, though.
>>
>>47479121
I am eternally angry that RAW you can't use polearm master with a pike because its "too unwieldy", but you can with a halberd and a glaive.

So arbitrary, in an edition where there is very little difference between weapons anyway, especially when there's different ways you can fluff the bonus damage from polearm master anyway, like twisting the weapon free from an impaling strike.
>>
File: pike.png (10KB, 478x156px) Image search: [Google]
pike.png
10KB, 478x156px
>>47483475
Polearm Master
>quarterstaff yes
>halberd yes
>pike no

Reach
>halberd yes
>glaive yes
>pike no
>>
File: pike.png (49KB, 679x39px) Image search: [Google]
pike.png
49KB, 679x39px
>>47483512
>>pike no
Do you enjoy being wrong?
>>
>>47479982
As an exercise. If there can be a version of the ranger without spellcasting, why not a bard with half casting?

>>47480004
You put an awful lot of work into being unhelpful.
>>
File: Screenshot_2016-05-28-02-49-10-1.png (235KB, 1440x1180px) Image search: [Google]
Screenshot_2016-05-28-02-49-10-1.png
235KB, 1440x1180px
>>47483428
>I'm clearly only arguing with a single individual, there is no way common accepted convention is shared by everyone but me

Thrown weapons are ranged weapons when thrown, you're an idiot
>>
File: 5e ranged weapons.png (10KB, 373x86px) Image search: [Google]
5e ranged weapons.png
10KB, 373x86px
>>47483580
>Thrown weapons are ranged weapons when thrown, you're an idiot
>>
>>47483532
Oops, my bad.

>pike has reach but isnt on polearm master list
>oh look, polearm master is so great
>never ever consider using pike because it doesnt work with polearm master and has no other benefit (its also 3x heavier than glaive/halberd (weighing in at 18 fucking lbs))
>forget that it's a reach weapon in the first place

To answer your question, no.
>>
>>47483467
>>47483428
>>47483584

So, what's an improvised weapon then smart ass? It's not suppose to be a weapon and it's being used as such. You're telling me if I throw a sword, as an improvised ranged weapon, it'd get all the benefits of ranged feats, but if it has the thrown property it doesn't?
>>
>>47483580
>a Mike "i didn't read my own guidebooks" Mearls tweet
>"please continue arguing with me, i found something thaat isn't a dumb argument!!!"
>>
>>47483613
>You're telling me if I throw a sword, as an improvised ranged weapon, it'd get all the benefits of ranged feats, but if it has the thrown property it doesn't?
No.
>>
>>47483596
I feel like the weapon balance is all over the place. You have weapons that are literally the same thing (glaive and halberd) while others can be functionally the same yet one costs more for no reason (morningstar and war pick). I feel like the weights are all over the place as well.
>>
>>47483624
Tell me, do you get the benefits of melee weapon feats/features/whatever with improvised melee weapons.
>>
>>47483613
>So, what's an improvised weapon then smart ass?
An improvised weapon is an improvised weapon. Like weapons with the thrown property, it can be used to make a ranged attack, but that does not make it a ranged weapon.

Think of it this way: a melee weapon is a weapon designed specifically for melee combat, while a ranged weapon is a weapon designed specifically for ranged combat. An improvised weapon is neither.
>>
>>47483613
>as an improvised ranged weapon
where the fuck are you getting that from, anon.
We are specifically stating that anything you throw -regardless- of having the thrown property does not count as a ranged weapon, because ranged weapons need to -fire- something Ie: use ammo, not be thrown.

fuck, you even quoted >>47483584 which specifically states melee weapons, then proceeded to be an autist and say your LS is an improvised ranged weapon, when it's still a fucking melee weapon, as per the thing you goddamn quoted.
In any case, an improvised weapon is a table leg, mug, rock, ect. You couldn't throw your Longsword in the first place because it's goddamn heavy, and not balanced for throwing (thus the no thrown property)
You -can- throw the above mentioned improvised weapons, since 1d4 damage means the object is presumably light/small enough to be hefted.
>>
>>47483645
Yes, absolutely
>>
>>47483687
You can totally throw your longsword as per the improvised weapon rules

Hell, if you have tavern brawler you can throw the damn thing with proficiency
>>
>>47483146
bro i totally picked sailor once, and my 2nd level wizard literally never saw water
that totes proves him right
>>
>>47483687
You're mad, and wrong.

Also, there's more than one person making fun you.
>>
>>47483706
yeah, I don't know why I typed that bit.
It explicitly states that you can.
>>
File: ragecage.gif (913KB, 240x181px) Image search: [Google]
ragecage.gif
913KB, 240x181px
>>47483742
>>
>>47483645
>improvise a dagger (Dagger: Finesse, Light, Thrown)
>improvised weapon that can be thrown for sneak attack

>improvise a dart (finesse, thrown)
>improvised weapon that can be thrown for sneak attack

>throw a rock
>its a le ranged weapon! sneak attack please

Now if you put your alchemist's fire/holy water/oil in a sling, then feel free to slap some sneak attack damage on there in my opinion. Does RAW support this (genuinely curious)?
>>
>>47483777
Yea, you can get rock sneak attacks, you can do that in other editions as well. Also, SA doesn't need finesse.

Learn what "or" means.
>>
>>47483777
>Now if you put your alchemist's fire/holy water/oil in a sling, then feel free to slap some sneak attack damage on there in my opinion. Does RAW support this (genuinely curious)?
No, because alchemist's fire and so on are not ammunition.
>>
>be goliath rogue/barbarian
>pick bear totem
>rage
>pick up boulder weighing a literal ton
>throw at unsuspecting enemy

SNEEEEEAK ATTAAAAAAAACK!!!
>>
>>47483811
A rock is not a finesse or ranged weapon. You do not get Sneak Attack.
>>
>>47483834
It is if you throw it, or put it in a sling
>>
>>47483811
I refuse to argue with you any further, you shitting retard. You're literally too unintelligent to understand why you're blatantly wrong, so you're just wasting everyone's time.

>>47483827
Fucking kek
>>
>>47483811
>SA doesn't need finesse.
How can one man be so wrong?

There is a difference between Ranged weapons, and weapons you can make ranged attacks with. This is what the throw property is for, and just because a weapon has the throw property, doesn't mean you can sneak attack with it. You can sneak attack with thrown daggers, because they are also finesse weapons, and with darks, because they are ranged weapons, but you can't sneak attack with a throwing hammer, because it's not a ranged weapon, it's a strength weapon with the throw property.
>>
>>47483851
A thrown improvised weapon is not a ranged weapon. You do not get Sneak Attack.

Whether or not the rock can act as a sling bullet is up to the DM, but by default it is not. If the DM says you can, you get Sneak Attack. If not, you do not get Sneak Attack.
>>
>>47483827
So much yes
>>
>>47483851
>or put it in a sling
>the rock is a range weapon
>not the sling
>arrows are logically ranged weapons then
>my rogue can throw arrows at people to sneak attack
>>
I just realised that the Lance doesn't have the heavy property (for some reason), and now I really want to play a halfling eagle totem barbarian with a giant fuck-off lance
>>
File: 5e_PHB_Feats_Dual-Wielder.png (41KB, 331x183px) Image search: [Google]
5e_PHB_Feats_Dual-Wielder.png
41KB, 331x183px
>>47483950
>dual wielder feat
>ride a giant eagle
>two-weapon lance fighting
>>
>>47483982
It's almost enough to convince me to play a beastmaster ranger/barbarian multiclass, provided a DM would let me take a pteranodon as an animal companion
>>
>>47484012
iv wanted to play a mounted ranger since 3.x and havent had any real chances
>>
>>47484012
>pterandon dies
>you cant get another one because there aren't any dinosaurs around
"my character drives his lance's handle into the ground and proceeds to sit on it. My new character is..."
>>
File: Weapons.png (461KB, 506x340px) Image search: [Google]
Weapons.png
461KB, 506x340px
>>47483863
Blame the book then, not my fault you make weird conjectures and assumptions about the rules.

Ranged weapon just means it does damage at a distance. That's it, it doesn't mean it has to shoot projectiles.

>How can one man be so wrong?
>>47483989
>>
>>47484071
Probably worth picking up mounted combatant then, or just not having fun
>>
>>47483555
Really? I thought I was being very helpful. Do an exercise for both of us if you don't mind. Picture the class you want and tell me how different it would be from what I said:
>my advice to you is to make a paladin with the bards spell list, and giving it all the bardic inspiration abilities instead of an archetype (placed at appropriate levels, of course)

My guess is that it would be suspiciously similar, with at MAX 2-3 features changed from what I listed.
>>
>>47484085
>A melee weapon is used to attack a target within 5 feet of you
So reach weapons aren't melee weapons? Good to know..

I am blaming the book, because the book is badly written enough that we have this confusion in the first place. But the whole damn reason the weapons table is broken up into Melee and Ranged in the first place is to "classify those weapons as melee and ranged" which, surprise surprise, is relevant for determining what you can and can't sneak attack with in the first place.

I'm not even sure what you're arguing for now, they (Wizards) went pretty hard to make sure you can't take advantage of sneak attack beyond the standard rogue stuff. Like you can't sneak attack in an animal form that uses dex, because even though it uses dex, their natural weapons don't actually have the typed finesse property.
>>
>>47483865
Then what the does an improvised ranged weapon look like?
>>
>>47484185
a thrown weapon
>>
>>47484185
No such thing.
>>
>>47484174
The much of weapon table of ranged and melee doesn't actually mean anything. They're just categories to organize, not weapon properties, while martial and simple are.

Look through the books, it never refers to "martial ranged weapons" or "simple melee weapons" beyond the table itself.
>>
>>47484185
Some kind of makeshift sling, blowgun, or dart, I assume.
>>
>>47477385
>if you're making shit up

Where does it say you can't buff yourself before going into combat? I would expect smart players do preemptively buff if they're about to charge into a room that they know holds hostile enemies.
>>
>Snilloc’s Snowball Swarm
>Each creature in a 5-foot-radius
sphere centered on that point
so how many tiles does that cover in a standard grid? other than its origin tile, its covering half or less of all the tiles around it
would it just get 5, 1 full + 4 half? or would it get all 9
if it wasn't "centered on that point" it would just be a 10 foot cube, smaller than either option
>>
note to the guy trying to make a thrown eldritch knight
some of the magical throwing weapons have the old properties of returning, and you could easily just "make" a returning one without it being a fucking "Dwarven Thrower" or something
so you dont even need bound teleporting weapons, or the warlock chained weapon
you could be a fucking bard if you wanted to, returning is instant
Thread posts: 366
Thread images: 39


[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / bant / biz / c / can / cgl / ck / cm / co / cock / d / diy / e / fa / fap / fit / fitlit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mlpol / mo / mtv / mu / n / news / o / out / outsoc / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / spa / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vint / vip / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Search | Top | Home]

I'm aware that Imgur.com will stop allowing adult images since 15th of May. I'm taking actions to backup as much data as possible.
Read more on this topic here - https://archived.moe/talk/thread/1694/


If you need a post removed click on it's [Report] button and follow the instruction.
DMCA Content Takedown via dmca.com
All images are hosted on imgur.com.
If you like this website please support us by donating with Bitcoins at 16mKtbZiwW52BLkibtCr8jUg2KVUMTxVQ5
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties.
Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site.
This means that RandomArchive shows their content, archived.
If you need information for a Poster - contact them.