/5eg/ 5e D&D General

>>48809255
I played a Storm Sorcerer (UA variant) that spent his money on an elephant mount and would Prince Ali ride it everywhere he went (complete with paid for escorts).

File: TOM-CRUISe.jpg (184KB, 767x975px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 767x975px

yo momma

>>48809255
Current game takes place in fantasy SE Asia or so, so all the players have gotten water buffalo as mounts and pack animals. If they go into the desert they'll probably need to steal some camels too.

>>48809255
I've had a giant elk and a brown bear as a mount

Does anyone have a site or resource that gives a brief description of each of the AL modules? Would love to run some for my home campaign, but don't really want to have to download and read through EVERY one.

File: Shirley.jpg (118KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 1280x720px

>>48809361
>fantasy SE Asia

Putang ina mo.

How do you get cool mount? Other than polymorphing a party member...

>>48809557
It's too early for this.


Source: Am Flip.

>>48809570
Find Steed refluff, try to seek it out. It's mostly up to the GM though.

I'm at a loss. I get one uncommon magical item on my sorcerer, and so far its up to these 4 choices

Bag of Holding
Cloak of Protection
Wand of the War Mage, +1
Or Winged boots

We're currently in the fire temple of PotA

File: mummylord.jpg (25KB, 240x325px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 240x325px

I want to run a mummy lord encounter.

The players don't know about the heart.

How would drop hints without giving the game away?

>>48809800
I was thinking of having them kill it.
They will loot it's lair and be cursed as a result.

Then reports of the undead continue.
But how to point them in the correct direction without spoiling it.

>>48809255
>What cool mounts have you had?
Summon steed comes with the shit you need to ride your mount, so I decided to go around in a chariot like it's the bronze age.

>>48809837
I can imagine a nice DM furiously erasing "mountainous land" and scribbling in "steppe land" as you requested that.

File: 108028.jpg (967KB, 900x1347px) Image search: [Google]

967KB, 900x1347px

>>48809800

Well in Dungeon World you could it by creating a Front for the mummy lord and using your GM moves to have hieroglyph-based traps show up throughout the dungeon.

I don't know what autistic way 5e does it, though, so I can't help you there. My honest suggestion is to switch to Dungeon World though.

>>48809824
Make it obvious that the undead are still coming from the tomb the mummy was in. This will draw them back to the tomb, and after discovering that it's alive they'll probably look into ways to kill it perminantly.

>>48809887
whatever virt

>>48809255
I am the mount! Seriously, up until my character's wizard traditions were changed to be a Theurge, I went around permanently Enlarged as a minotaur using the potions. Big enough to be any of the party's mount. Still big enough for my minotaur to be the halfling's... We need a Saddle of the Cavalier.

>>48809513

Seconded.

>>48809742
Bag of Holding is insanely useful, especially for someone who dumps Strength.

Winged Boots are better for people with heightened speed. A monk with those gets far more use than a sorcerer, but flight is useful.

>>48809800
Powerful rulers, the kind who become mummy lords, tended to be buried with servants and slaves alive, people who could well resent having been condemned to die with their master. Having one of them help the party so they can finally move on and be free of their tyrant could be one way.

>>48809742
Bag of Holding or the wand. Ac is not important unless you are fighting in melee range of shit. Your tanks and fighters should be able to keep most shit off of you.

>>48809742
If you're not a sorcerer who gets to fly (storm sorcerer gets tiny flight bursts, dragon sorcerer gets flight later) might not be worth bothering with winged boots.

Cloak of protection is useful at pretty much all levels.

Bags of holding are common enough and someone else might have one. It's not like you need to carry around tonnes of shit and unless your DM is being really strict about carry capacity you can get away with things.

wand+1 is probably the best now, but you could probably find better wands later.

So
>short-term campaign
Get wand
>long-term campaign
Get cloak

I'm hearing a lot of hate. What exactly is wrong with variant humans?

>>48810002
I like it

>>48810154
Everyone picks them because they get a free feat

They don't work the same way other races work

People (retards) think they're overpowered

So I'm getting together a small game where we switch DMs after every adventure. Two of the players are relatively inexperienced when it comes to DMing. Anything that should be kept in mind to make this go as smooth as possible? We're already using session-based XP so we don't have to worry about awarding enough experience points.

>>48809588
''Hey GM can I have an adult brass dragon as my find steed?''

>>48809887
>he doesn't just apply fronts to every game he plays

File: 1468438338871.jpg (30KB, 420x280px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 420x280px

>>48810180
>People (retards) think they're overpowered

>Great Weapon Master or Sharpshooter at level 1

Yes they are.

>>48810154
Nothing.

They encourage lots of humans in a campaign, and less 'I'm special because I'm a special race' characters. However, you could see it as a bit boring, too.

Variant human is very versatile and viable for any class, but what they get can also be obtained by anyone else once they get their stat increases, whereas races get special benefits.

I'd say everything's in the right place.

>>48810229
>Refluff
As long as it's the stats of a warhorse, or even better one of the bad examples, you can pick anything.

File: no_rorschach.gif (2MB, 400x165px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 400x165px

>>48810229

>>48809887
The mummy in dungeon world would have like 8 hit points but arbitarily be able to devour players legs off.

>>48810350
It's a REALLY ancient brass dragon ;)

>>48810329

> +1,+2, or +3 weapons are OP at low levels, or pretty much any level of the game.
> -5 to hit is somehow also OP

>>48809255
Why is there a Space Marine on that lion?

>>48810329
That is overpowered, but not gamebreaking.

The feat that gives you the ability to give the entire party temporary HP is another one that's really powerful at the low levels, especially with a big party.

Once you get past the low levels, being a human has locked you out of some of the neat class features.

>>48810441
Which is precisely the reason I dislike it. Across all levels it's not OP, maybe not even imbalanced at all. But that doesn't mean it's a good addition to the game, it makes the game less fun for other characters at low levels, since others have better or cooler features, while at higher levels the variant humans are the ones that have a worse experience, since they front loaded their powers.

>>48810397
>-5 to hit, for +10 to damage
>ignore half- and three-quarters-cover (Sharpshooter)
>extra attack on crits/killing blows (GWM)

At first level, those things are all pretty powerful.

>>48810500
> the scales tip at one point or another

It's almost as if there's a....balance.

>>48810329
>GWM at lv 1
I see why the other anon said "retarded"

>>48810518
>Missing the point
I'm not saying there's imbalance at all.

>>48810329
That's those feats being overpowered

>>48810441
>>48810329
>class
Sorry, I meant race.

>>48810500
Yeah. It could probably be better if they found some other way humans could be versatile without that stuff. Instead the human might be getting a stat increase at level 4 whereas the other races pick up that feat, and then the humans are probably worse off than the other races. since they're now roughly even except the race gets racial features.

It's still not entirely anti-fun. They won't be entire worlds better than everyone else, and they'll have flaws. The other racial abilities can be quite good at low levels, too. At level 1, a half-orc who can take a hit and set themselves back to 1 HP is pretty neat. The extra crit die isn't likely to come up but would be a bit deal.

Halflings aren't much different from having the lucky feat.

That sort of thing.

It might be interesting if humans got something unique which works a bit better later on but might actually trip them up earlier on, but I'm not sure.

I guess being of a different race has social benefits sometimes.

I'd rule is as 'imbalanced, but not imbalanced enough for most people to care.'

>>48810329

GWM and SS are HORRIBLE at low levels. You don't have enough proficiency bonus to make it worth it. You'd be much better off with pole arm master or crossbow expert.

>>48810599
I suggested it last thread, take half-elf and give them +2 CON instead of CHA. Half-elves are good for any charisma class, so with CON instead it becomes good for any class. Look at dwarves, they're good for almost anything except they're hindered by the subraces giving +WIS/STR, armor proficiencies are situational, and the speed decrease. Still, the +2 ensures they're never a bad choice.

I just make them the same as the other races, same types of benefits, some subraces based on where they're from, +CON/WIS for being generally survivable, not just the physical toughness thing like orcs and dwarves, but being able to survive almost anywhere and adapt. I've seen homebrews where they have good charisma, but I do think it's important to have them be quite versatile. It's just that I don't like breaking the design style of races in general to get there.

>>48810704
They're great at low levels because you can one shot enemies with them.

>>48810925

I doubt it's worth the decrease in accuracy. You're probably better off with Lucky, Pole Arm Master, Crossbow Expert, or something like that and grabbing those once your attacking stat is higher.

>>48809255
I am really annoyed with the Monk in our group. I play a Fighter and was suppose to be the tank of the party but now the Monk has a higher AC than me, deals out a shit ton of damage, can't be touched by anyone, and never dies.

Whats the point of playing a Fighter in 5e?

>>48810704
With 18 dex, +2 proficiency and +2 archery you can still have a bow attack modifier of +3. That might not seem great but a bugbear, for example, has an AC of 16. You would need to roll a 13+ to hit, which is a 40% chance to hit.
Furthermore, with sharpshooter and a longbow you can shoot from 595ft away without disadvantage. That's about two football pitches. You don't even need full line of sight, since you ignore three-quarters cover.
And that gets you at least 15 damage in one shot. Half a bugbear's average hit points.

>>48811017

you can't be serious

what's your build. You should have as much AC as the monk at least if you're wearing full plate + shield. Monk can't beat that without magic items. His damage will be lower than yours as you level too, especially if you're a GWF. His HP will also be less.

>>48810973
Yeah, naw.

Being able to one-shot those CR 1/2 orcs with 15 HP is great.

>>48811059
>Monk can't beat that without magic items.
Not easily, but 20 dex and 20 wis gives AC of 20, same as full plate + shield. A wood elf who rolled really well for ability scores can have those stats at level 4.
>>48811096
Yeah, if you get a +3 bonus from dex and archery fighting style you'd hit orcs 55% of the time, and one shot them from across fuckin fields.

>>48811186
A fighter that put those stats into str and con would be a better tank, and if he rolled poorly then the other guy being a monk wouldn't be the issue to begin with.

>>48811186
>rolled really well
By the same logic bards are broken because they can add 1d6 5 times per long rest at level 1. He was complaining about class balance. If this is higher level, he should out-damage him and have more hp, if it's lower level he should be more tanky except wisdom and dex saves.

>>48811275
I was just pointing out that it's technically possible for a monk to have that AC, even relatively early on, without magic items.
>>48811273
>A fighter that put those stats into str and con would be a better tank
Oh, most definitely, between Second Wind and a d10 hit die fighters make much better tanks than even the luckiest of monks.

>>48810727
Yeah. The armour proficiencies don't mix well with the +2 strength and dwarfs not caring about armour encumberance unless you then spend a feat on heavy armour mastery.

>+2 strength to wear heavier armour when you ignore the negatives of heavy armour anyway
>gives all armour proficiencies except heavy armour and shields
I guess the reason there's +2 strength and +1 wis is because the armour proficiencies are more flavour than anything.

Still, the races are designed to be more restrictive. Soft restrictions that encourage players to take a certain playstyle for each race with several optoins, though they can go against the tide.
If you have a dwarf wizard, they're likely to be a tough wizard. Otherwise, except fightery types of dwarfs.
If you have a half-elf, expect them to be a bard. Less likely, but still possible, a sorcerer or warlock. Perhaps even a paladin.

I kind of like the soft-restrictions. It encourages races to play like their races expect.

The thing is though, most bards now are half-elves.

>>48811186
Firstly, how did they get 20 wis and 20 dex so easily? They must have given up a load of feats.
Secondly, they can't use shields and suck at weapons. You can find magical shields or weapons sometimes.
Thirdly, you can probably easily get 20 con and be much healthier than they are.

I'd like to know what your character sheet/build looks like.

>>48810193
Not much.
Just make sure the less experienced players don't power escalate too fast.
Before you know it you could all be ib 3 plus gear fighting dragons and the tarasque.


...
That sounds fun.
I have a great idea!
3 plus weapons for everyone.
Oh look. ..a dragon!

>>48811401
On the topic of bards... would a strength based Valor Bard be viable? Say a dragonborn as the race.

>>48811486
Sure. Not good but certainly viable. A dip into fighter for heavy armor and a fighting style would help though.

>>48811486
It's probably fine, but you want your charisma to be at least middling

>>48811059
He has a +1 ring which helps him out immensely.

It just feels gay. He does everything perfectly well. Every turn he stuns then attacks with advantage, he puts out so much damage its unreal.

He runs around the battle barely taking any damage. I've nearly died 3 times now and he's barely taken any damage even when baddies are attacking him and he ALWAYS hits.

He has two lvl 20 stats so he pretty much auto hits everything.

File: 1379800539394.jpg (268KB, 982x644px) Image search: [Google]

268KB, 982x644px

How does /tg/ handle critical failures on attack rolls?

>>48811530
Sounds mostly like luck, maybe build. What level are you guys?

>>48811556
They... miss.

>>48811560
level 12 so he does 1d8 dmg per hit and autohits everything with his lvl 20 stats.

when he stuns he gets advantage so he pretty much does 4d8 + something like 30 every single round of combat.

>>48811556
If you are using a bow/crossbow you just ran out of arrows/bolts
>counting arrows

>>48811560
also his fists count as magic so he pretty much always does full dmg meanwhile i usually fight tihngs with resistances to my wpns, dont have a magic weapon yet but we are working towards getting one.

even my dm was surprised at just how much damage and utility monks put it. he runs so fast too and can climb on walls and jump and do all kinds of crazy moves that make our rogue look useless.

is there even a point to play anything but a monk i know i am raging right now but its just stupid.

>>48811682
>1st attack of 1st game
>1
>sorry guys, I'm out of arrows
Is this a joke?
Keeping track of arrows is really not hard

>>48811579
How do your stats compare?

>>48811725
>level 12
>doesn't even have a +0 magic weapon
Your DM is a faggot.

>>48811682
Hmm for a ranged I'd normally make them either roll a DEX save or simply, "You hear that dreaded, snapping sound... your arm vibrates from the sudden impact of your bow string snapping..."

>>48811733
well my STR is 20 but i took feats like an idiot... i can do OK damage but the monk always does a lot more and always hits. he has a very low miss rate and attacks at advantage almost all the time.

>>48811747
ya i know but he is kinda new plus we started at lvl 10. im not that mad at him for it im just pissed off at this gay ass monk who does everything better than everyone else. i feel useless in fights he can tank better than me.

wtf is 20 ac on a fucking monk thats just gay.

>>48811725
The magic weapon thing is a big deal, and is a definite oversight on part of the dm. Being stingy with magic items while the monk maxes his stats is going to tip the scales definitely.

Being mobile is intended, however. The rogue should be a bit behind in that regard.

>>48811556
I usually punish the pc somehow, they stumble and fall landing prone or maybe hitting their head on a rock taking damage or their great axe gets lodged in a log and they have to use their next turn removing it. Stuff like that

>>48811812
the 1 thing the rogue has is charisma i guess but it doesnt matter because even if something goes wrong the monk just spams flurry of blows and kills the thing and barely takes any damage.

ya like i said my dm is kind of new and i think afraid of bringing too many magic items into the game. we probably shouldnt have started at lvl 10 for his sake but its ok. so u think getting some magic items wil lmake the rest of us actually useful because right now every encounter is a bruce lee movie and we just run up to the fight in time to see the monk kill everything.

>>48811771
You should have gotten magic weapons and armor from the get go, the monk should NOT be a better fighter than the fighter. Nearly as good, maybe.

>>48811852
ya i will have to talk to the dm the rp is so boring because the monk does everything.

>>48811401
>Firstly, how did they get 20 wis and 20 dex so easily? They must have given up a load of feats.
Wood elves get +2 Dex and +1 Wis. So, if you rolled 18 and 17 at character creation, then you can use your level 4 ASI to put Wis up by 2. That's VERY unlikely, but it is possible (I rolled a drow bard like that once; 20 dex and 18 Cha at level 1).
Plus like I said before >>48811390
>I was just pointing out that it's technically possible for a monk to have that AC, even relatively early on, without magic items.
If I wanted to tank I'd play a goliath or dwarf barbarian or fighter, not a wood elf monk.

>>48811556
Depends on how I feel. I once had a goblin shoot itself in the hand, for example.
Also two of my players have gun-users, so crit fails for them are already misfires.

>>48811771
You have 3 attacks so with +5 strength and shield master you knock prone, then with advantage 3 attacks (6 with action surge) for 1d8+5 each. Plus manoeuvres or higher crit chance. Again, post a bit more details about your build because if you took shitty feats, manoeuvres etc. it's not the monk's fault, at least not only that.

Also, I wouldn't normally recommend this but seriously just ask your GM for a magical weapon, unless this campaign just started, it's ridiculous to not have one at level 12.

So here's an idea I recently started using for my homebrew:

Fighting style as a feat - instead of gaining an ASI you may pick a fighting style and boost one of your physical stats (Str, Dex or Con) by +1.

Improved unarmed strike:

Your unarmed strike damage die is 1d6 and you may use either your Str or Dex mod for your unarmed damage rolls.
You also gain a scaling to hit bonus to your unaed strikes equal to a fifth of your character level rounded down.

Throwing master:

Your ranged attacks with thrown weapons gain a +2 to hit bonus and you may draw up to 2 pieces of ammunition as a free action.
You may also ignore any close combat or long range penalties to your ranged rolls with thrown weapons.

Some other ideas would be appreciated.

>>48811922
inb4
>rolling for stats

File: 1465396481850.jpg (273KB, 1000x1302px) Image search: [Google]

273KB, 1000x1302px

anyone else really enjoy the Magic Iniate feat? I always pick it and take the find familiar spell. It made me really love my bearbarian and open hand monk.

>>48811984
I saw a suggestion once of giving a fighting style with weapon master, which makes a lot of sense since that's shit as is. Unarmed strike seems purposeless and the scaling to hit is stupid. Throwing weapon master is alright, I just use the Close Quarters Shooter from the UA but for throwing weapons, drawing 2 weapons is necessary if you're /your GM is a RAWtard though. I also really like mariner from Waterborne Adventures.

>>48811771
You are probably going to catch up pretty quickly once you get a weapon that deals more damage. Also I think the stun thing lasts a while so you can benefit from it too.

He's always going to run faster and do the weeaboo fightan shit, but you don't wana be a faggy ass ninja in a European fantasy game anyway.

>>48811984
>Your unarmed strike damage die is 1d6
Tavern Brawler only makes unarmed strikes do 1d4, so I think 1d6 is too high.
>Your ranged attacks with thrown weapons gain a +2 to hit bonus
Already covered by Archery fighting style.
>you may draw up to 2 pieces of ammunition as a free action
Is there a limitation on how many pieces of ammunition you can draw per turn?

>>48812068
>anyone else really enjoy the Magic Iniate feat?
It's probably my favourite feat. It can make such a fun little addition to characters. Like a barbarian with a few basic druid spells because his tribe gave him a good education in the spiritual side of his powers. Or a sailor-background fighter, whose crew had basic bardic magic cast through their sea shanties.

>>48812176
>Is there a limitation on how many pieces of ammunition you can draw per turn?
Nope, but thrown weapons aren't ammo so you're limited by the object interaction rules. Making them count as ammo should be sufficient.

I have a ton of ideas for magic items, both practical and more joke-ish, that I want to give my players. It's an Eberron campaign, so lots of them isn't very outlandish. (Just last session one of them looted a headband from an old woman that causes natural looking hair to appear from your head when worn.) What's a good way to keep myself slowed down?
We're about to go into session 4, and the players already have 'faulty' spell scrolls for Burning Hands and Fireball, a small glass Detection Lens that works as Detect Magic but only for Illusion or Transmutation when looked through, the hairband, and an ancient busted Scabbard of Healing that now only works when you bash things with it. (+0 magical club, 5 charges, after hitting can spend a charge to heal for 1d6+Str, gain 1d3 charges daily, can sheathe anything that can be inserted even if longer than the scabbard)

>>48812176
>Like a barbarian with a few basic druid spells because his tribe gave him a good education in the spiritual side of his powers. Or a sailor-background fighter, whose crew had basic bardic magic cast through their sea shanties

I agree, the cantrips in this edition are so rich in fluff that they sometimes feel more magical than ex. some 5th lvl spells

Are there any stat blocks in any splatbook for any edition of D&D for a creature that is essentially a statue of mass slaughter? I guess like a cross between a marilith and a golem? Having multiple arms, being gigantic, having supernatural attacks, and being made of gold are all bonuses.

>>48812068
Only time I've done it is for Hex + Eldritch Blast on a Sorcerer.

Had a great idea to do it for Find Familiar for my Swashbuckler (parrot), or Find Familiar for my Assassin Rogue (snake); both of which I'll never get to play.

File: RAMPAGE.jpg (52KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 640x360px

>>48812313
Forgot pic related.

>>48812176
By RAW you may only draw one weapon/throwing ammo per turn.

I didn't know archery covered thrown weapons.
Please expound on that.

The scaling to hit bonus is to account for DMs not giving you a way to boost your to hit bonus with unarmed strikes and a 1d4 damage die is too low to matter even for Fighters who get 4 attacks let alone other classes who get 2 attacks at most.
The scaling to hit bonus and 1d6 damage die makes it relevant for all classes including monks who need a way to boost their to hit with unarmed strikes anyway.

>>48812343
A hit bonus is one thing, making it nearly double your proficiency bonus is something else entirely.

>>48812374
A fifth of your character level rounded down meaning you get a +4 to hit when you reach level 20.
Basically:
LvL 5 = +1 to hit
LvL 10 = +2 to hit
LvL 15 = +3 to hit
LvL 20 = +4 to hit

All that with a 1d6 damage die that doesn't go up unless you are a monk.

It's perfectly balanced.>>48812374

>>48812337
>>48812328
I'd take an iron golem and divide it's damage up among multiple attacks.

>>48812313
Hydra maybe? I haven't encountered one but it seems like that's how that fight would go.

>>48812453
Yeah I was thinking one fourth for some reason. But yeah it's still a problem, that kind of hit bonus if you're already a monk is ridiculous. How about if sets unarmed damage to 1d4 if it isn't already that high, and gives a +1 to unarmed damage. besides. That makes it +1 to hit and damage for monks and decent damage for other fighters. That's strictly worse than +2 dex, so you can give them something else of significance.

>>48811922
>rolling for stats
Yes, I'm doing it
>someone rolls higher stats than you
>they're more powerful than you
What were you expecting, a free cookie to compensate for your low rolls?
Monks, barbarians, paladins.. MAD classes benefit greatly from good rolls.

The monk is a stealthy tank. The 'flowing river' tank, who predicts and dodges blows, who conditions their body to take hits.
They're not the paladin. The paladin is more of a support and buff tank.
They're not the barbarian. The barbarian is a straight-out meatshield.
They're not the fighter. The fighter has a number of tools to just roll more damage.
They're not a heavy armour bard, or heavy armour wizard, or cleric, or any of the tank-casters. Those casters rely a lot on spells and such to be tanky, and tend to have less health anyway.

I'm sorry to say, but if the monk rolled better stats and focuses on tanking, he will be a better tank. You should still do better on damage in the end, even if you focus on being pretty hard to hit, anyway. You have access to more feats which can increase your health, AC, saves, negate half-damage from dex saves...

Unless you rolled really crappy stats, you should be fine.

>>48811556
Situational.

If you're attacking something risky to hit, such as an enemy being grappled by an ally, you will probably hit your ally (After accounting for your ally's AC, so there may be a reroll against the ally's AC. And a second nat 1 there will probably fuck up your weapon.)

In the heat of battle, even masters can slip up and make mistakes as people rush about the battlefield.
If you're using a flimsy weapon on a really hard surface, there may be a risk of breakage.

However, if there is no reason to inflict a penalty, the natural 1 is simply a miss. If there's no logical reason it should miss (Master of perfect shooting with +20 to hit firing at a still target at 100ft), then it's bad luck. Perhaps a fey creature absolutely despises their perfection and an ususually strong gust of wind blew the arrow off-course slightly.

To say a nat 1 never critically fails is to take away all element of risk.

>>48811556
Normally, I don't, but I've recently introduced a weapon durability system. All weapons have DP depending on quality, and using the item and rolling nat 1, or taking a nat 20, reduces the item/armor DP by one.

Mending spell restores all DP of an item to it's full value, but if it hits 0, the item becomes broken and has to be repaired for a sizable cost.

>the guy bitching about monks
No one else finds this delicious?

>>48812670

I personally like to run combats with X number of mooks and 1-2 "boss" characters. Natural 1s don't automatically fail to hit against mooks and natural 20s automatically kill mooks. "Boss" characters follow the normal rules.

>>48812728
Maybe ironic, given their usual treatment. But yeah, equipment makes a fighter strong and monks don't give a shit.

>>48811725

If you don't have a magic weapon by now your DM sucks. You should be getting these at around level 5-6, which is why the monk gets that ability at those levels.

The monk being mobile is part of the class, and him using stunning strike should open up opportunities for you and your rogue to unload on something. Fighters, especially GWM fighters, will easily out damage a monk in the later levels. If you sword and board your AC and HP will beat his by miles with appropriate magic items.

>>48811186

Hence why I said can't BEAT that, as in, he can't get above 20 AC without magic items.

>>48812068

I'm a big fan of it as well. I'd probably take it on most of my 1/3rd and full casters if I have an extra feat, just for the extra cantrips. That's especially nice for EKs though.

File: tumblr_mxz6feUpM91s2wio8o1_400[1].gif (841KB, 335x425px) Image search: [Google]

841KB, 335x425px

>>48812815
Sure, a lot of the issues are with the DM, but someone whining like a child at being worse than a monk? After everything the monk class has been through in 3.PF? My oh my.

>>48812728
Only half as delicious when some of my players started to bitch about my beastmaster ranger being fucking fantastic.

Especially you, Sean, for spending 30 minutes of character creation time bitching about me "not pulling my weight". Eat a dick.

>joined group that has adventured for a bit together
>existing characters don't get along
>some knowingly put us in danger, or escalate a situation to make it lethal
Is this common in groups? I get people play their characters how they want, but its gotten to the point where we've failed quests.

How do I help manage selfish/ stupid characters and party tension? It feels like the group would naturally break up if things keep as they are. I've defaulted to a more passive play style of damage control to manage peoples fuck ups, and others have tried arguing but it just made relations worse.

Just getting into this game...

dubs decides what color dice i buy from amazon today

>>48812990
Red and gold.

>>48812728
It's just people who don't realize that 20 AC isn't that big of a deal later on in the game with no "armor". A CR 10 Young Red Dragon has +10 to hit, congrats it's now 50/50 you don't get hit for 2d10+6, not including its two other attacks.

I haven't played a monk in the later game, and I feel like if I did I would regret it.

>>48812990
Those red and black elven ones that are almost impossible to read and I regret buying them.

>>48812977
Handle it like you would in real life, gain a position where the party cares about your opinion, talk it over, then have them talk to each other and say ether focus on the job or get the fuck out.

But in order to do this your character needs to be a bit of a take charge kind of guy who can say no thanks we don't need you.

>>48813011
Even at lower level a high AC won't always help you. I've seen guys with higher AC's try to tank a group of weaker enemies and get absolutely wrecked because they got good rolls.

File: 1461977288998.jpg (132KB, 630x1178px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 630x1178px

>>48812965
Out of curiosity, how'd you do well with it? Are the problems not as bad as people would have you believe, or was your DM just more accommodating? Using an out of combat companion more like a familiar, or decking them out with barding and such?

>>48813011
muh Patient Defense, eat shit dragon

20 AC is pretty decent, though. It's not amazing (hello sword and board Eldritch Knight with magical armor and shield and the Shield spell) but it sure beats those poor light and medium armor slobs most of the time.

>>48812977

I'm not sure if I can offer any advice, but I'd like to say it's not common. In my 13 years of playing/DMing, I have literally only once seen a group that was so bad that the characters didn't get along and this caused problems. What I mean by that isn't that the players were all dicks or bad, but their characters (which they acted well) just couldn't work together. This can work fine for some story types, but if there's any real structure to the game, like a story or quests/missions they're expected to go on, it can completely fuck everything over.

Long story short, I had a group of 4 regulars, 2 new guys joined as per Regular 1's request. The 2 new guys both rolled Chaotic Evil characters and made it a point to kill innocents/attack the other party members, etc. It was all pretty much in line with their characters, but a huge problem for the party of all LG/NG characters. I told the 2 new players I wanted them to make different characters after one session, because it just clearly wasn't working out, and none of my regulars had any fun that night with how shitty things went. The 2 new players refused, and that was the end of it, they weren't welcome at my game table anymore. They were both fine people, and I still talk to New Player 1 every now and then to this day, but it just didn't work out for us.

What I'm getting at is that this kind of thing can be different depending on your group. Is it the players to an extent, or is it really just their characters? If it's the players causing these problems it may be best to just leave, there honestly may not be anything you can do about it. If you're not having fun being a "nanny" character that has to try and lead/guide all these other characters, then why bother? The point of D&D is to have fun, and if shitty players/characters are ruining it for you, it's not worth your time or effort.

>>48813165
>What I mean by that isn't that the players were all dicks or bad
>The 2 new guys both rolled Chaotic Evil characters and made it a point to kill innocents/attack the other party members, etc.
No, there were definitely dicks.

>>48813303
This. "It's what my character would do" as a defense is a sign you're playing with an asshole. Whether their character would do it or not, that character doesn't fit into the party so in a game where the party does things you would have to be an asshole to think that's going to work.

I think inter-party drama can be cool but if it comes to PvP I just say that they should solve it out of character, either compromise, kill off or have a character leave, change the character so they can fit in, etc.

I'm kinda stuck on what to do for my players. I now how I want an encounter to play out as a narrative, but I'm stumped on how to play out the fight. Heres the scenario:

>4 lvl 2 PCs, Fighter, Wizard, Cleric, Rogue
>Holed up in a simple town church against a large scale kobold attack on the town
>They called for help, and it'll come in 36 hours
>They just have to hold the church until then, protecting the villagers inside, against a kobold siege
>They've done well managing resources, barricading the church, and mounting a defense
>They have 1 night left, 6 hours, until help arrives and trainwrecks the kobolds

I've been having "hourly" attacks hit them, so it's not just nonstop combat, but ebb and flow. Mixed numbers of enemies, different sneaky tactics, throwing in some oddball minibosses (kobold beserker). But now I think they're getting bored. I dont want to increase the danger, because we've had a few close calls with TPK already. Just looking for a good way to challenge them so they feel like they were really the rock that broke the wave.

>>48813107
You have a collection of animal companion character art?

>>48809513
bump

>>48813542
Maybe you could do a session with no combat, focused on the party keeping up morale inside the church. Perhaps eventually leading to some of the villagers deciding to take up arms when help arrives, to drive the kobolds back.
You could even ramp up tension by mentioning that more time than usual is passing without an attack.

>>48813058
>Handle it like you would in real life
I'm really not sure how I'd handle these people in real life, save abandoning them. The group showed signs of dysfunctional the moment I joined up. Some have friendly fired on purpose when they know we're low on healing and have a long way to go. They just wanted to deal aoe damage and try a new spell.

> your character needs to be a bit of a take charge kind of guy
My guy definitely isn't that sort which is part of what I'm struggling with. I guess if the problem members continue to behave foolishly he might have to step up more for survival reasons. My build is more flexible so I guess I can try to do what you recommended and make people value my opinion to try and sway a decision.

>>48813165
Thanks for writing that out. I'm new to table tops so I really wasn't sure if this was just how these games went. Basically everyone in the group is some lawful/ good mix but some of them are playing lawful stupid with no self sense of self preservation, or value in their allies lives. Others aren't great at tactics and keep triggering traps, making bad decisions despite strong hints from the DM that it's going to end poorly.

The players themselves are nice, and I think they're trying to do what their characters would but some act blatantly suicidal which to me seems out of character. If you're at 2HP and the party is fucked up provoking someone who could party wipe us seems insane for a "good guy" to do. I've purposefully not revived but stabilized one guy a few times because he'd potentially get us killed, or at minimum kill himself again and waste my spells in the name of ego.

I don't have anyone else to play with so I want to stick with it and hope things get better. I don't mind playing nanny a little but I can tell our DM is getting a bit frustrated too since he has to tweak some things because some plot line quests have been fucked up badly.

File: dogdance.gif (2MB, 360x414px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 360x414px

What spells should a Lore Bard jack from other classes?

With two spells to pick, from ANY CLASS LIST, I'm paralyzed. So many options! So few slots!

>>48813107
It's really not as bad as everyone makes it out to be, honestly. I got barding for my animal, meaning it's AC is fucking retarded all the time for a pittance, and most of the animals in general have at least a status effect on them which was immensly helpful.

My main was a wolf, and by the end of the game, there were rounds where my pet was outdamaging me. Pets can make 2 attacks, and I was going two weapon fighting, so it basically went one from my pet, another from my pet at advantage from the enemy being prone, then one from me with adv, and then my bonus off hand weapon. Add in the fact that I would cast hunters mark on the beast instead of myself made us a fucking monster.

The only real problems I had with it were the HP. Even with fantastic AC that made him untouchable, a breath weapon wrecks him.

My only concession is to ask the DM to let you get the same exact animal back that died when you spend 8 hours resting for a new beast. That's about it.

>>48813788
Aura of Vitality. Become the best healer in the game.

>>48813542
They're Kobolds bro.
They like to dig tunnels.

>>48812990
Black and Green

>>48813788
Aura of Vitality and Fly

>>48813900
Thar she blows.

>>48813795
>Add in the fact that I would cast hunters mark on the beast instead of myself made us a fucking monster.

What?

>>48813900
k

How do you guys keep track of food/water supplies? I want to introduce this into my game without making it seem over burdening, or maybe that's the point?

>>48814048
Our DM has us consume 1 ration each day. We'd probably nibble on it throughout the day, but that's when he just announces you all loose 1 ration.

Hes been placing water sources in locations for us to refill waterskins but it's becoming inconvenient so I think he's hoping to give us a magic item for it.

I kind of like managing inventory stuff, and the weight of food/ water a little. It means we need to plan a bit more. Two of our players can make food/ water so if we ran out we could still survive but it would mean we waste two spells thus planning ahead.

>>48814119
Alright cool that's a really easy way of handling it!

>>48813973
I forget what level, it's somewhere around 15, but you can cast spells with a target of self onto the pet. I started casting hunters mark on my pets.
Wolf: 2d4+7 + 1d6 + chance of prone twice per round, even when I'm using my own bonus action for something else.

>>48814134
>I forget what level, it's somewhere around 15, but you can cast spells with a target of self onto the pet.
But hunter's mark isn't self range.
Do you not know what Hunter's Mark does?

>>48814133
Yeah, it's not so bad. If you're in a dungeons with enemies they need water too, so he can usually rationalize it someway. You can also have them do medicine checks, both to make sure it's clean and the taste quality. Like maybe you find some dirty water in a cave, but everyone's desperate. There's also spells for purifying food/ water. Just make sure you have an idea of what spells your party has, otherwise they might have to get a disadvantage to health if they run out of food and water and lack the ability to make some/ clean what they find.

>>48814133
>>48814184
I should also mention for food, it can also allow players to go hunting which can be neat. If you kill some huge snakes you could try cooking it over a fire and making some rations.

>>48814172
Of course I know what it does, and it's a range of
>Range 90 feet
...whoops. Hope my DM doesn't realize...

What's your preferred source of pre-made characters?

>>48814267
None. If I need a character, I make it.

>>48812990
I got a slick set of dice that are very easy to read from Chessex, royal blue with gold writing. Could not be happier with them.

>>48813683

This is probably something you need to talk to the DM about. If even the DM is getting upset, he needs to address the players.

The Lucky feat says you can roll a luck die after you roll the die, but before the outcome is determined. Is there a gap between rolling a 1 on an attack and critically failing that you can use your luck die in?

>>48814477
Talk to your DM. Most would say sure, you can use Lucky then.

What's the longest range (non-resource hogging) attack you can get?

Warlock: EB + Invocation?
Longbow + Feat?
Something else?

Would Lair Assaults like Forge of the Dawn Titan conceptually work in 5e?

>>48814626
Sorcerer 2/warlock X with Spell Sniper and Eldritch Spear invocation, using the Distance Spell metamagic: 1200 feet.

Longbow with Sharpshooter: 600 feet. You can shoot it at 600ft regularly but you have disadvantage without sharpshooter.

File: 890218ced3c5abe39b51d2f42a88c1ad.jpg (21KB, 236x368px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 236x368px

Anyone have advice on playing a warlock?

>>48814267
Dude, you can make a whole party for your imaginary friends in like 30 seconds. Why use pre-made characters in 5e?

>>48814715
1. Bladelocks suck. Not badly, but you might as well just eldritch blast all day long.

2. You want short rests to use spells more often. Make sure your DM actually gives you proper rests, or they're not DMing properly.

3. You will be using eldritch blast unless you are a bladelock. And you will be using it a lot.

4. If you still insist on playing a bladelock, consider your stats. Do you have really good dexterity and charisma? Then that might be okay.
Do you have only one good stat, charisma yet STILL dont' want to eldritch blast all day? Consider going pact of the tome instead of pact of the blade and picking up a melee cantrip along with shillelagh. You're putting yourself in danger, but at least you can do something.

5. No, pact of the chain's familiars DO NOT grant you magic resistance. Stop asking.

6. Eldritch blast scales even when you multiclass, so don't be too ashamed to multiclass a bit if you feel like it.

7. If you haven't figured it out yet, you will be picking 'agonizing blast' as an invocation. Unless you're a bladelock. Even then, consider it.

8. Disregard everything I've said, have fun and get killed. Nobody's stopping you from going pact of the blade.

>>48814888
Kinda tangentially related, but I'm playing a bard and was planning on going warlock 3 for the sake of getting the coolsville familiar for character thematics.
My question is if Bard's arcane secrets can be relearned like normal bard spells, as taking three warlock levels locks out the final arcane secrets, I believe, for Warlock, and their level 9 spells are honestly really boring.

>>48814263
Well it's not horsecasting or anything so it should be fine.

>>48815302
>relearned
If you mean 'can you, upon levelling up, change the bard secret to a different bard secret'...
No.
You can relearn a bard secret as a normal bard spell, from what I remember. Not as a bard secret, definitely not as a higher level bard secret.

You only need the 'find familiar' spell if you want a familiar. Pact of the chain just gives you a few more options.

>EKnight 3/Abj Wiz 2
>get two feats and an uncommon magic item

What should my feats be and what'd you guys suggest for a magic item?

I was thinking Warcaster for one of the feats, don't know a second.

For the item I was thinking of a Ring of Spell Storing, since I'll generally use Shield and Absorb Elements more than anything else and three more uses a day is pretty big

Do the Drow HAVE to be evil?

Can I play a neutral Drow?

How does bard compare with wizard for utility?

>>48815492
You can dual wield scimitars and have a pet panther too.

>>48815492
They're only in the handbook because of Drizzt, so you can definitely be good. Most aren't, but it can definitely be rationalized with how fucking stupid their culture is.

So, Conjuration Wizard minor conjuration; what exactly can I conjure? anything?

if we needed to pry open a chest, could I conjure a crowbar and give it to the fighter to pop it open?

>>48815520
nothing will really match a wizards utility

lore bard's close though

So I posted this origin a few weeks ago. Tried to make a 5e version of the Red Mage job from FF (Specifically 5). Your guy's thoughts?

THE RED HEART

Extra Cleric Spells Known
2 Cleric Cantrips
1-3: 2
4-7: 3
8-11: 4
12-19: 5
20: 6

RED HEART

As a Red Heart, you may know up to two more spells and two cantrips with which you have the spell slots to cast chosen from the Cleric's spell list. These spells do not count against the number of spells you can know, and they are considered to be sorcerer spells for you. Your Cleric spells known increases to 3 at the 4th level, 4 at the 8th level,5 at the 12th level, and 6 at the 20th level. You may not choose Cleric spells that require slots over the 5th level.

BONUS PROFICIENCIES

At 1st level, you gain proficiency in light armor and three simple or martial melee weapons of your choice.

EXTRA ATTACK

Starting at 6th level, you can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn.

CRIMSON AURA

At the 14th level, all who look upon you are enamored with your talent, which radiates like a beacon when you wear the color of your namesake. When you are wearing plainly visible clothes or armor that is primarily colored red, you gain advantage on Persuassion, Intimidation, and Deception checks, but have disadvantage on Stealth checks. Both effects do not apply when you are not wearing red.

DOUBLECAST

Starting at the 18th level you learn how conserve your pool of Sorcery Points for when you need them the most. Your Twinned Spell Metamagic now costs 0 points for cantrips of the Evocation and Conjuration schools.

1/2

File: Shootthatbarby.jpg (29KB, 193x228px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 193x228px

>>48814263
>you've been hunter's marking your own pet so that you deal 1d6 extra damage to your own pet and get advantage on tracking it

>>48815466
Why do you have two feats?
Why is your DM throwing you free feats?

If you are a variant human, you will have one feat at most.

For the magic item, get adamantine plate armour.

>>48815574
2/2
ORIGIN FLUFF:

A Red Heart is unlike any typical sorcerer. While most of them stumble upon their powers by chance, a Red Heart is one who seeks it out. With no desire to be bound to a patron like a Warlock or stuck in a musty library like a Wizard, the Red Heart chooses to undertake in a bloody ritual wherein they cut out their own heart and replace it with a carefully construted arcane stone. This stone serves as the engine of not only their body, but their spellcasting as well. A faint glow from a scarred chest, barely visible through light clothing marks the bearer of a Red Heart.

>>48815628
dm is giving us all a free feat at 1st level

he said variant human is allowed too, so I get 2 feats at level 1

Is immunity to greats really that worth it? I think I'd rather get mithral plate armor so I can carry more shit and actually be somewhat stealthy

I am playing a one-on-one campaign, and my DM has given me a nice party with a loli sorcerer, a loli warlock, and a loli wizard.

Does anyone know a good way of adding flavour to the combat and roleplay so it doesn't just flow like one person with a single super powerful character? I feel like I always end up having them act in much greater coordination than would normally happen in a multi-player campaign.

>>48815520
Wizards can cast ritual spells from the book, and have a whole fuckton of them.

Some of the wizard paths such as portent have some really great utility.

Bards can match wizard in utility, but in other ways. Bards have jack of all trades for example (Don't forget - Jack of all trades applies to initiative rolls, too.) alongside expertise.
Then, lore bards have inspiration they can give and cutting words. And, magic secrets. You can obtain otherwise unique spells such as ranger's magic quiver before even ranger can obtain it.

>>48815662
Oh, good, I thought you'd misunderstood how feats work and thought you got a feat just for being level 5, when multiclassing doesn't work like that.

Kind of sucks for you, though, because you'll have only up to level 2 spell slots and you'll only know level 1 spells whereas any pure spellcaster will have level 3 spells and spell slots. Multiclassing would mean you've lost out on the precious level 5 features. Still, Eldritch knight gives you a load of armour and stuff and the level 2 wizard features are neat.

Immunity to crits is a big deal if you have a ridiculous armour class. If you're spamming shield, the only thing that should be hitting you is crits. There's no point in increasing your armour class if the only thing hitting you is crits.

Being stealthier wouldn't be bad, but you should already be able to carry a lot unless your DM is being extremely strict. Mithral armour might also be good if you want to have pisspoor strength, but then that'd kind of bring into question why you're going up EK anyway.

You'll probably have a really stealthy person on the party, so you should probably let them do the stealth. If you're putting everything into strength and int then your dex for stealth checks might suck anyway.

Thye're all sort of viable options if your DM allows it. Plate armour of either 'light weight', 'anti-crits' or '+1 AC'. I'm personally a glutton for armour class /crit resistance.

>>48815451
Thing is I want the fairy or psudeodragon, which is really hard to pull off without chain pact.

>>48811556
On your turn you fumble, losing your footing in combat, pulling a muscle as you swing off balance, catching your weapon against the ground or other terrain feature, accidentally set your sleeve aflame with a careless spellcast or otherwise just getting caught out by some minor failure.

Your turn ends immediately losing any remaining movement or bonus action and you lose your reaction. You may finish resolving the remaining attacks from Extra/Multi attack feature or finish resolving additional rays from Spells such as Eldrich Bolt, but may not use any other abilities such as the Grapple or Shove from Shieldmaster/TavernBrawler. If you are concentrating on a spell you must save DC10 against it.

If you fumble off your turn, then you simply lose your reaction, perhaps that spell you Nat1'd the save on was particularly painful and winded you, or perhaps the Fireball left your sleeve aflame and you had to spend a moment flapping the arm frantically, generally diverting your attention.

>>48815783
The fairy and the psuedodragon aren't real fairies or psuedodragons anyway. They're just a familiar that has taken the form of one. Unless the DM says otherwise.

So, eh. Take a hammer to your familiar and bash it until it looks vaguely like a dragon and you have yourself a psuedodragon. If that doesn't work, weld a dog to it.

>>48812068

Took it on my first bard, for that eldricht blast and shield combo

Wish I had taken the ritual spell caster feat instead though, so I could jot down all these rituals and free up space for better spells

>>48815796
>fighter attacks a dodging target with multiattack (3)
>has to roll a d20 8 times
>8 chances to then lose all their other actions while they're attacking

It's not entirely unreasonable and not entirely unfair, but you definitely have to make sure the players are fine with this rule, because it will hurt anyone who makes a lot of attacks more than anything. Warlocks and fighters both do a lot of attacks. An ability like scorching ray cast as a level 9 spell against a prone target (nobody will ever do this, but hey) will have TWENTY chances to make you critically fumble.

.. You know, that does sound pretty cool. Firing so many rays you're practically gauranteed to fuck up.

>>48813788

There are three spells to jack as a lore bard, depending on your party. One is counterspell. You have to get counterspell
Not only does Jack of All trades counts towards Counterspell, so does Peerless Skill

That the bard doesn't get counterspell on his own is retarded. It's literally BATTLE OF THE BANDS, THE SPELL


The other depends on wether or not you got a healer or a wizard in the party. If you haven't got a healer, but have a wizard, then Aura of Vitality. If you have a healer, but not a wizard, then Haste. If turns your fighters and rogues into beasts.

>>48815937
Likewise, a fighter unloading his entire payload of attacks into a nimble duelist focusing everything he can into dodging avoiding or hindering the fighters efforts, I can easily imagine the evasive duelist flashing a wry grin as the warriors sword becomes stuck in the wall.

File: nope spock.gif (1MB, 248x193px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 248x193px

>>48809887

>>48815990
>at level 17, the bard does counterspell as a 1d20+1d12+8 check if they use a bardic inspiration die and have 20 charisma
Well, fuck.

Anything new from unearthed arcana?

>>48816020
It'd only be fair to make the dodging duellist roll a d20 to not get a 1 and fall over on their butt as they're trying to dodge several big sword sweeps while everything else is going on.

>>48816135
If you haven't been here recently, you can now obtain wish at level 14. Doesn't mean you'd be able to cast it, but you'd know it.

>>48815830
Worse comes to worst, wait till you get the level 18 Magical Secrets, stick some plate barding on your little owl. That extra AC then makes him a CR 1 creature so you can True Polymorph him into a fairy or pseudodragon, and the pseudodragon would actually give magic resistance!

File: Confused.png (65KB, 506x500px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 506x500px

>>48816166
Wish by level 14?

>>48816135
This month? Decent defensive warlock (seeker?) which needs some invocations, and a "better than a cleric" wizard subclass called the Theurge (literally a wizard with all domain perks + option of cleric spells, but earlier).

As far as discussion here, pretty much everyone thinks that said wizard is broken, or invalidates clerics. Warlock is well recieved, but needs some work.

>>48816166
Well, it only adds Wish to your domain spells for the Arcana Theurge. You know, the spells you don't automatically know but which you have to learn in order to take new cleric spells. So purely as written, it is actually a negative ability...

That's what you get for being a wizard replicating a cleric who is replicating a wizard!

>>48814477

You can use it on a 1, even if a 1 is always a failure (for attack rolls). Even though you already know the outcome 'knowing the outcome' here probably refers to the DM's description.

If you knew you needed an 11 or more to hit something, and rolled under that, you already 'know the outcome' but it's still eligible for a Lucky roll. I don't see why the same couldn't be said for a 1.

>>48816184
Theurgist wizards are wizards that instead of getting wizard path features, get cleric path features.

They also get to write cleric domain spells into their spellbook because who needs rules?

Then, they get the cleric capstone ability... BEFORE THE CLERIC DOES.
One of these cleric capstone abilities is arcana cleric, who steals spells from the wizard.

So, you become a wizard to steal clerical secrets to steal wizardl secrets before the cleric can steal yours, and you now know wish.
But you don't have any level 9 spell slots unless you multiclassed wizard14/caster3 or the DM fucked up and somehow gave you level 9 spellslots at level 14.

>>48815451

AFAIK you can turn a bard secret into another bard secret. You just can't turn a non-bard secret into a bard secret.

>>48816104

Oh right, the Charisma modifier.

Also, don't forget when they learn how to cast Glibness

Remind me, why don't they get this as a given?
It's more of a class feature at this point

>>48813542
Kobolds are ambushers and trap setters. The biggest twist I can see is that they get to stand on the roof top as the final attack is almost dispersed and party can hear the trumpets call and see the knights on horseback and a few carts full of eager troops and well needed supplies in the distance riding towards the town with banners held high, the party know this siege is over.

And then suddenly the first few knights fall as the ground caves beneath them dropping them into spike pits. Huge logs slide down the hillside pulping the carriages full of supplies into splinters. Unready troops try to rally as spellbolts from sorcerers and volleys of arrows begin pelting them, kobolds begin to surge out of hidden trenches and overwhelm the reinforcements. The town militia in no state to assist, the party can only watch as the much needed help is broken and cut down by the ambush. The game has changed from "Defend the keep" to "What the fuck do we do now.". Can they get to the fight in time to help, even a few wounded knights and a handful of soldiers may still help the cause? Should they try to rally the villagers to evacuate and abandon the township. Did the kobolds know about the reinforcements specifically and if so, how? Perhaps the party can leave the town to defend itself while trying to track and eliminate whoever is leading the Kobolds since waiting for help is no longer on the table. The party have lost their saftey net, they can't just sit and hold, they have to be active. The kobolds go from being the unassuming horde of annoying runts to the organized and malicious threat who are smarter and more savvy than they expected.

>>48816213
Well fuck.

Now it's even more stupid.

>>48816257
There's nothing that seems to state you can.

Once you reach the level at which you obtain magical secrets, you gain any two spells of appropriate level and they are now bard spells.
This means they behave as any other bard spell you know.

This means you can't turn them into magical secrets, only into other bard spells.

That's how I'm reading it.

>>48815796
>Your turn ends immediately
Yeah, nah. You're shit.

>>48815466

You might want to go EK 5 first, just so you can get extra attack and the ASI. I'd look into grabbing Wizard levels around 7/10, since you'll have most of the great EK features (and Fighter features) by that time.

Are you trying to build tanky? Maybe get a cool shield. You'll definitely want warcaster if that's the case. I'm a big fan of Magic Initiate too, to help get you a free spell as well as giving you two more cantrips since EK selection is so limited, but you could do well with Lucky, Alert, Resilient (Wisdom), Shield Master...there are probably others too, that's just off the top of my head.

If you're using Polearms/Heavy weapons GWM and Pole Arm Master are a shoe in. Sentinel if you want to control enemy speed too.

>>48816318

I'm basing my answer on something I've seen on twitter or sage advice, I think. I know it works that way for EKs and Arcane Tricksters too; if you relearn one of your non-restricted spells you can pick a spell of any school instead of having to pick from their limited school list.

>>48816391

If it works that way for EK's and AT's, it certainly works for the Bards as well. Their learning model is the exact same

>>48816391
I searched it a bit, and here it is.
http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/12/13/a-spell-learned-via-magical-secrets/
It seems to be saying that you can only retrain magical secrets as bard spells, as I expected from RAW.

If your DM is kind, they might allow you to re-train a magical secret within boundries (You cannot up-train the magical secret, it must be of the level you obtained the magical secret or lower)

>>48809255
Building a level seven Ranger (dex build). He will dual wield short swords. I want him to jump in to the middle of mass combat and attack stuff, jump out, etc.

Going Hunter: Horde Breaker, Escape the Horde (unless there are other suggestions).

What would be a good feat to take? I don't feel like he needs the Dual Wielding feat, although I like the AC bonus. Was thinking maybe Defensive Duelist.

This is likely for a one-off adventure.

Any suggestions?

>>48816249
>>48816207
Sure it can be OP and reduce the need for clerics, but for the majority of the levels the Theurge is actually slower in getting the same abilities. It gets the level 1 abilities at level 6, the level 6 abilities at level 10, and it can't pick and choose the spells from the cleric list until at least level 10 since before then it is stuck with only domain spells. For some comparisons:

Level: Cleric spells known/Theurge spells known, Cleric spells prepared over what a Theurge with equal Int has

1: 15/8, +2
3: 32/12, +4
5: 52/16, +6
7: 60/20, +8
9: 73/24, +10

Oh, and the Theurge has to get all ten of those always-prepared spells through the level-up spells before they can get to pick the cleric spells they want. Considering most play is in the 10 and under range, while 14 is getting into the upper limits of the average campaign, the Theurge actually spends most of his time behind the appropriate cleric barring his use of wizard spells. Until you get to higher levels of play, the Theurge is a worse cleric, which is about what you would expect for the benefit of all their wizard spells.

Really, the only "broken" part about them is the +2 DC. But that one is potent enough that it may qualify the whole package...

So is the Unearthed Arcana Ranger an apology to everyone who likes the ranger class?

Anyone want to take a read of my custom classes for my campaign? There's no magic so I am making 3 new classes and 1 subclass for the fighter. Appreciate anyone that does this.

Drive link:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4wjicJWBMMwQnVvRF8zVkYyMFk/view

>>48811556
Our DM usually has us attack ourselves, someone else, or something funny that fucks us over somehow.

Since some of our players hit pretty hard it's actually kind of scary. I almost got killed by one of the players so I have to try to position myself differently with other melee fighters that can hit hard. It can be kind of funny, but make some situations unfun especially if we're in rough shape.

Bright side is the same thing happens to enemies.

>>48816510
Yeah. I like to bash the theurgist a lot, but I wouldn't call it overpowered.

It's competing with some really good level 2 abilities.

I guess I'm just salty at how long it took to get the UA and then they come out with 'You get a wizard, except with cleric domain features.'
It.. It just isn't interesting, and it feels kind of like it only serves to annoy your team's cleric by copying a bunch of their stuff.

>>48816530

doctors should automatically have proficiency in the medicine skill

>>48816565

i used to think that was funny but i've become so turned off by the idea. it's stupid to imagine a legendary sword fighter having a 1/5th chance to smack himself every turn.

>>48816335
I've played with DM's who rule that if you roll a 1, all attacks against you until next turn are at advantage.

I've also played with shit DM a few months ago who ruled that if you roll a Nat 1, your attack hits the nearest Ally to the target and you fall prone. That was the most infuriating one, I once managed to accidentally headshot our Paladin who was fifteen feet away from my target. Playing a Battlemaster fighter with Sharpshooter who can snipe a guy at 600ft through an outhouse window, but at 15 yards still manages to stick the druid in the back for 1d8+18 damage then fall on his arse every other combat. The character eventually died when the party barbarian says, after a combat is over, "Hey DM, you know how Anon hit me twice that encounter and I'm still enraged, I want to attack him and kill him." and the DM was okay with this. The players said "Well that sucks but it seems fair, the archer HAS been known for shooting us in the back lately so we're all not too friendly with him."

>>48816565
The biggest problem I have with this approach is it disregards a bunch of things.

>you roll a 1
>you fuck up badly
>your weapon cleaves through Mr. Ultramagetank with 28 AC who you could normally only hit on a crit anyway
I like the approach, but I prefer the DM reroll the attack against the new target's AC to keep it fair and to account for the fact you're not always going to infalliably hit an ally.

>>48816616
If you have a DM like this, become a halfling and pick the lucky feat with portent.

Everyone will hate your guts, but you will feel nothing but smugness as your crappy shounen main character plot armour shields you from anything and everything.

>>48816530
>>48816585

also, i really, really really dislike it. It's hard to overstate how much I dislike this pdf. I feel like my eyes have been soiled

When your custom classes are starting off with feats that everybody can get, you know you're in for a good ride. Why not just not get rid of magic?

>>48816616

It's such a shit rule. Why would people subject themselves to such horrible games? I can see something minor like lodging your weapon in the ground or something or bouncing off for a moment, but anything more than that is honestly bullshit.

>>48811556
Most of time normal miss. If ranged attack and other creatures are in line of fire, they may get hit. If the player was attempting something particularly unusual, he might suffer from it, e.g. jump and hold onto a chandelier to attack = it falls off and the character goes prone. In case of enemy doing that, he's most likely going to suffer from it.

>>48813795
>then from me with adv...

I though directing your pet was an action as beastmaster?

>>48816585
He tries to tie it into the current combat situation, like you go to hit but it ricochets off the enemies armour because he was moving to attack someone else and your weapon hits your buddy instead, or you loose your footing on the terrain and fuck up. Sometimes it's stuff that makes us look incompetent, which can be funny if the situation isn't desperate.

>>48816621
I'm not sure if he's taking the players AC into account, actually. I should ask that since I've nat 1 friendlies who have high AC. Will bring it up with him, thanks.

>>48816735

an arrow ricocheting off armor and doing minor amounts of damage (by no means should it deal full damage) is fine. swinging a sword and accidentally cutting the guy behind you on a 1/20th chance because lol! is bullshit.

>>48816715
Not that guy but that is such bullshit. If the ranger class didn't exist and a PC had a pet attack dog or something, I would not think twice about letting it attack without using the PC's action. Maybe a bonus action to give it commands to start attacking, stop, or switch targets.

>>48816649
I was tempted to go Kobold Diviner worshiper of Tiamat, we were playing Horde of the Dragon Queen and I had a cute idea for a character that was 80% to piss off the Paladin and Cleric of Bahaumut.

It was going to be a Fortune teller of the Cult, who had a prophetic vision of the future that Tiamat did not want to be released, for whatever reason in her almighty plan she was not ready to emerge and forcing her do to so brought her wrath down on the entire cult. As he is a lowly kobold, no one listened to him and his ravings despite his skills of divination.

So he abandons the cult to do what he feels he must, to do what he feels his dragon-mother truly wants even if it means fighting against his allies in the cult itself. His opinion on Bahamut was to the note of "Tiamat is the mother of all dragons, and Bahaumat is akin to the father, both are cut from the Great Io and while I do not hold the platinum dragon in reverence, you are free to do so as you wish and will always be brother to me friend." while giving the Dragonborn a huge smile. Be so nice and helpful and friendly that they can't justify attacking him just because he worships Tiamat. Especially so whenever he uses Portent or his other abilities to rescue or support one of them saying with an earnest smile that "Tiamat smiles down upon you brother!~".

>>48816791
That's true, but that's also technically a house rule.

>>48816735
There should definitely be an extra layer of protection. It's cool, and I appreciate natural 1s actually doing something other than 'miss'. It's a good sort of dynamisism.

But if you're attacking a creature you can only hit on a 20 and you have disadvantage, let me tell you the odds:
1/400 chance: You actually hit the target.
39/400 chance: You hit your friend, regardless of if they have a billion AC.
360/400 chance: You miss.

Yes, you heard me right. You are thirty nine times more likely to hit your friend than your intended target.

Why not just target your friend instead in that case and fuck up on purpose?

>>48816836
lmfao this would be a hilarious encounter because even if the DM rolled to see who it hit, it would still be more likely that they would hit their target.

>>48816765
I know. When some of our players announce they want to use a strong melee attack before they roll for hit, get a nat 1, and anyone is within range of him we hold our breath and hope for low damage since hes been making us take full.

Its mostly been a problem for the melee classes. I don't think we've nat 1 on attack spells but I'm worried he'd fuck us hard with it. I need to figure out how to talk to him about it. It hasn't been that big of an issue yet but I'm worried he'll kill someone making us do full damage. The AC re-roll at least seems reasonable.

>>48816836
That's a good point... we've been fighting some high AC enemies lately, and been having some bad luck hitting anything while they can always hit us, and we can automatically hit ourselves. I think he'd be willing to nerf it to some extent.

>>48816715
When you get later levels, you get Extra Attack feature which means you can attack twice. You can attack with one of them and let your pet take the other. At even later levels, whenever your pet attacks it can attack twice, so you attack once and them twice.

>>48816791
>>48816715
>>48813795
According to beastmaster, here's how it should be working:
>if you have multi-attack and your pet makes the attack action, using your action, you may make one weapon attack.
This means the pet makes as many attacks as it can (two at level 11), and then you have one attack. Two-weapon-fighting should not proc.

And, as has been said, hunter's mark does not work for your pet.

In total, at level 11, this means your pet gets two attacks and you get one attack, but you still have a bonus action.

>>48816978
Because I am too lazy to check, and you appear to know, if the pet already has multiattack do you have to wait for level 11?

>>48817077
Yes.

You can use your attack to let your Beast attack once, at level 11 you can make it attack twice, or use the "Multi attack" feature.

>>48817077
Multiattack is ignored, you can't trigger it at all. Which is stupid since it's factored into the CR calculation anyway, the only difference is +proficiency bonus to damage overall.

>>48817077
Wait, no, I meant No. No you cannot use your pets multi-attack until level 11.

>>48817145
It's been Errata'd or at least mentioned in tweets that you CAN use the multi-attack action instead of attacking twice using the level 11 feature.

>>48816657
because the campaign is gonna discover a continent full of it later. Their civilization just hasn't discovered magic yet.

>>48817077
To be honest, I don't have a lot of ranger experience, but going by RAW...

There is nothing that says it cannot multi-attack.
Multi-attack triggers whenever you use the 'attack' action.
You are making your pet take the attack action.
However -
Enemy multiattack might not necessarily be the same. The monster manual only describes multi-attack as "Creatures that can make multiple attacks have multiattack."

So what I think, and what others here seem to be saying is that you can use multi-attack if your beast has it. It makes sense, as it was 'factored into the CR calculation'.

>>48817198
Ah, yeah I remember that now. Still worse than just attacking twice though, unless there's a CR 1/4 beast that has 3 attacks from multiattack.

>>48816978
>>48816978
Fun ranger that I played was a Dwarf "Brawler" Urban Ranger with a Wolf.

Used Tavern Brawler feat, ran up to foes with his Wolf and let the wolf attack them ideally knocking them prone, then elbow dropping them and forcing a grapple to get the Prone-Grab lock. Was not powerful but was fun as fuck.

File: wizard separation.gif (949KB, 275x275px) Image search: [Google]

949KB, 275x275px

>>48815574
>>48815655

Ok, let me get this straight.

You want to play a charisma-based caster with access to both arcane spells and healing, and proficiency in light armor and a few weapons. It borrows spells from other classes and gets a second attack at level 6. Sort of a jack-of-all-trades class.

It's a bard, you made a bard. You took out the "music" fluff and added in the crystal heart thing, but the class you're trying to make is already in the book.

I applaud the impulse to creativity; these games are for messing with. But it's usually simpler, more balanced, and easier to convince DMs and players to go along with refluffing or slightly altering an existing class than creating an entirely new one. And there's already a class that does everything you want.

>>48817243
It's more in what the Attack action does, multiattack is a separate action. The Attack action explicitly says you make one melee or ranged attack, and things like extra attack can let you do more than that one attack.

>MINOR CONJURATION
>Starting at 2nd leveI when you select this school, you can use your action to conjure up an inanimate object in your hand or on the ground in an unoccupied space that you can see within 10 feet of you. This object can be no larger than 3 feet on a side and weigh no more than 10 pounds, and its form must be that of a nonmagical object that you have seen. The object is visibly magical, radiating dim light out to 5 fee! The object disappears after 1 hour, when you use this feature again, or if it takes any damage.

So if I see another wizard's spellbook, without ever opening it, I could copy down all the spells he has in it by summoning a copy? Spellbooks are nonmagical objects that should fit all of the above requirements.
Doesn't this feature also make Conjuration wizards the best libraries/walking encyclopedias? If I ever see a book just once I can make a copy of it on the spot unless it's a magical book.

>>48812059
you can't inb4 the truth

>>48816583
I kinda like it, because I feel like it widens the opportunities to RP a follower of a god/dess. I feel like those two and the paladin create an interesting triad:

Paladins are the Champions, riding out and directly enforcing the will of the god. They are the hands of the gods.

Clerics are the Clergy, spreading the word of the gods through both words and actions. They are the mouths of the gods.

Theurges are the Scholars, closest to the monks of reality's deities. Rather than spreading the word of the gods, they search on behalf of the same. They find new knowledge, record it, and safeguard it. They are the legs of the gods, going where the gods will so the rest of the body may act.

>>48817330
Where does it say that you copy an existing object?

>>48816715
It is. I was talking about higher levels when I have two attacks.

At lower levels, I used I believe a python to restrain on hit as opposed to knocking them prone.

>>48816791
Nah, as someone who has trained animals before, I get the narrative. If you have an animal that isn't following your command to the T, then that animal may lash out on their own.

Also, as someone who fell victim to the old trope of "I picked a fighter! Tom picked a Druid! We're playing 3.PF!", I fully support this game scenario wise.

Besides, there's nothing stating that you can't also get an animal and train it to attack, but the DM was in final control of that one, and that animal didn't come back when I did the 8 hour animal bonding ritual, so I didn't do it very much, but it was always an option if I wanted to, say, hunt down a tiger and train it to attack and then put it inside a building.

>>48816616
I got one to top that. I had a 4e DM that insisted we list out ALL of our powers we were planning to use that turn, and if we rolled a nat 1, we hit ourselves with ALL of it. I killed myself a couple of times before he rolled a nat 1 for his DMPC and suddenly said "Well, you know, after months of your complaining and me not listening, you're right, Anon. That nat 1 thing is technically not a rule."

>>48816978
Yeah, at level 11, your pet makes two attacks, you make one attack, and that one attack is enough to proc the bonus action attack. If you get lucky with the prone, up to 3 of those attacks can be made at advantage.

>>48817077
There was a sage advice feature where it stated that if it has multi-attack, you can pick that, or you can make it do a basic action, but you can't make it multi-attack twice.

>>48817243
The same sage advice stated that multi-attack is a singular action, so you can't replace a monster's second attack with, say, a grapple. Honestly, I don't agree with that, so when I'm running I don't do that, but that's just RAW.

>>48817326
Multi-attack for fighters literally says "you can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn."

Unless monster multiattack is different, which is is in some ways (Monster multiattack says which weapons the monster must multiattack wtih) then I'd expect it to follow those rules.

>>48815628
>>48816342
Yea I think I will go EK 7 or 8 before MC'ing into Wiz.

The extra spells/cantrips/arcane ward health/arcane recovery is great and all but extra attack + an ASI and then a faster way to 7 EK is probably better. War magic + another ASI is great

7 EK is the holy grail really, just need to make it to that. From there I will maybe take another level in Eknight for that ASI.

>>48817330
You haven't seen the spell's so I'd say you can't duplicate them. This is gona make a nice meme though.

Is there any way to make unarmed viable without splashing into Monk?

>>48817414
What? That's not multiattack. That's extra attack. Multiattack is different than extra attack, as the name should suggest. It's under monsters' actions, which means it's an action. You take an action to multiattack, which enables you to attack twice or with two different attacks etc. It doesn't do anything for the attack action, since it's not an attack in and of itself.

>>48817467
Check out >>48811984, though I don't know why people want this.

>>48817424
Yeah, I'd definitely recommend going up to 7 or so.
I'd probably recommend booming blade or green flame blade to go with that.

>>48817330
If you haven't seen the contents of the book, how would they be something you've seen before?

>>48817471
Oh, good point.
Sorry, I fuck up at reading sometimes.

You're probably right, then. There's nothing saying you can command the beast to explicitly take the multiattack action.

>>48817414
>>48817471

Yeah, honestly, I think that's a pretty silly distinction. It limits the monster's actions a bit in a way I don't like at higher levels. BUT, it's what the rules have in mind, so a houserule it remains.

>>48817488
I want to be a Barbarian that punches the shit out of everything.

>>48817467
Barbarian with tavern brawler makes a good unarmed grappler. You do run into problems with non-magical weapon resistance, though. Maybe you could hash something out with the DM, like magic caestuses or something.

>>48817617
Ask your Gm to play a pugilist, one of the generally recommended homebrew classes which is all about boxing and shit I think. Covers the people wanting strength monks and rogues, as well as unarmed fighter/barbs.

>>48817441
>>48817537
Well if you've seen a flask of Alchemist's Fire, but not the actual contents of the flask you can still reproduce it. So whether you see inside in object or not doesn't seem to matter much.

File: 1454466786579.jpg (89KB, 750x1000px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 750x1000px

>>48817663
>one of the generally recommended
i don't recommend it but /tg/ and reddit (i assume) love it for whatever reason

>>48817696
By this logic you would only be able to produce air or electromagnetic waves... Or maybe your own eye balls/brain tissue.

I need help understanding how to make a campaign and adventure. How should an adventure work? To clarify, is a short adventure terrible for level 1 players, let's say they are in Town. Town has a problem where a noble was forced out of his house due to ghosts and animated objects. He set up residence at town hall and asks the adventures to help solve his problem. Would it be cool to just end it after or do I need it to tie into a bigger threat? Also is it OK to have two major threats in a single town for PCs to solve?

>>48817663
Well, I was mostly asking if there's a viable way to do it RAW. I don't like using online homebrew for obvious reasons.

How strong of a disadvantage / negative would you require to let someone use "Flaws" like in previous versions?

Most of the time, it would be something like being permanently blind or deaf, in exchange for a feat.

>>48817330

It's a minor ilusion that has mass to it,

>"herp a derp, what if I minor ilusion the pages of a wizard's book?"

well, good luck with that skippy

So I made a mistake in my adventure.

The characters went to a village for help find some missing children, but the NPCs were sad but living their lives normally, they were no desperated, so the characters now think that the villagers are sacrificing the childrens to have a good harvest.

How could I justify the fact that they aren't desperated?

>>48817826
i mean i would just do it on a case by case basis... it kind of depends on the intention

>>48817788
You always need to have multiple things available for the players. Give them a sense of choice. Maybe you set up an adventure for them, but they fuck it up and kill the important NPC by accident? Or they decide to do something else as a group? In that situation, you're in trouble.

Anyway, you can have small one-shot mini-adventures within your larger adventure. Have an overall main goal of the campaign, then fill it with a bunch of smaller goals that may or may not tie into the bigger goal. For example, they go to a thieves hideout to stop them from stealing from a local town. The thieves ledger of stolen goods has a list of buyers, and maybe one of them is the main villain of the campaign. From there, you can make it so that stopping those thieves cuts off a source of income for the main villain, which in turn means he has a smaller army by the end of the adventure.

Just some basic ideas.

>>48817740
I mean I'm not a fan of the fluff and would only use it if I did an all-urban or more modern setting I think. I have barely read anything of it, new classes are just not appealing.

>>48817805
For RAW, tavern brawler is the best bet. You can use a shield and still get unarmored stuff so it's only a decrease of 2 average damage per attack. The big thing is you spend a feat on that, and it's not a great feat really, and also you can't benefit from any weapon feats once you max strength.

>>48817696
No, you can recreate that specific flask and recreate alchemist fire. You could just as well recreate that flask with water in it. What you're proposing would be like copying a chest without knowing what's in it. You don't have that information, so how would you know what to fill it with? You'd just end up with an empty chest.

>>48817424

Might consider going into Arcane Trickster. not as good spell recovery, but it might play better with a Dex EK

>>48817696
If you haven't even seen the alchemist's fire used, how do you even know what it is?

The idea is you're supposed to have some knowledge about the item. Sure, the wording says you have to have only seen it, but minor conjuration isn't supposed to allow you infinite knowledge of anything you can see. Otherwise, you would become a scientist.

If I were a DM, I would rule that you must have seen each function to use each function, unless it is obviously implied (like a cork is obviously to be uncorked)

If you see an opaque flask of holy water, you can produce an opaque flask of some liquid you know. You would not know holy water unless you've seen it, and even then holy water is magical.

>>48817849
So is this a good idea? Can I have the major villain be a fake ally to test the PC'S to see if they are strong enough to help him on his quest for ultimate power. So at level 1 he'll send them to this haunted town with a letter asking for powerful adventurers. Then have multiple problems for this town that needs solving. He'll the house directly appear and ask the party for help acquiring magic items. I'll try and see how it goes. Maybe they'll want to kill him on the spot, which is fine. I'll try and invent a second and third major villain. Am I on the right track?

>>48817833
Life sucks. In medieval Europe, kids died all the time. Conservative estimates peg child mortality rates at around 25%, while more liberal ones have gone up to 50%. In the toddler years, about another eighth were expected to die. Even up to age nine can kill an additional 6%. Kids disappearing and/or dying would be tragic, but life went on.

It was even worse when epidemics hit. In such a case, surviving children were the minority. So you don't need to justify the fact, child mortality was most definitely a thing in the era D&D replicates. Magic might reduce death rates somewhat, but the rates would still be high.

>>48817888

>you've seen a flask of alk fire
>you conjure a flask of alk fire
>flask shatters
>turns out the liquid inside is just colored water, because that's as far as the conjuration effect goes

>>48817833
Have a child yourself and lose it to prove to your players that it's no big deal.

>>48817788
Use your first sessions to tie player characters to each other, to set the setting of the world, give players basic knowledge of the world and introduce things they may be interested in persuing.

It's good if you do small side-adventures that players have a reason to do it other than 'loot, loot!'
Perhaps if they complete it they'll gain faith of an NPC who'll help them persue the party's main goal, or they need to do it for an item that'll help them defeat a guy later.

If players just so happen to wander into the countryside for no reason and just so happen start a side-quest that just so happens to suddenly tie in with the major plot, it might seem a little silly.

>>48817832
So if I see a scroll but don't have time to learn it, you're telling me I could use Minor Illusion to create a nonmagical version of it, then Minor Conjuration the illusion of it so that I can copy it into my spellbook?! Thanks so much for the tip, Anon.

>>48817951
Well this is a way to see indeed.

>>48817967
Exactly.
Why would it catch fire when you've never seen the alchemist's fire catch fire?

>you've seen a flask of alk fire
>you conjure a flask of alk fire, but since you don't actually know what alk fire does, you instead decide it instantly kills all enemies near you
>flask shatters
>BBEG is now dead

Are there any DM's guild 5e one shots that would be good for new players?

>>48817833
>How could I justify the fact that they aren't desperated?
You secretly rewrite the adventure so that the players were actually right. It'll make them feel good, and let you save some face.

>>48817833
>>48817951
Also, those NPCs probably have lives to live, and if they're on the brink of poverty it just means less mouths to feed, though maybe less work on the farm. It's a 'We have to keep working, we don't have time to mourn, and we hope they'll come back. There's nothing we can do.' sort of a thing.

If the players start getting suspicious and start burning everyone as heretics, have them become the bad guys. Because that's how they're going.

>>48817987

why bother with the conjuration at this point?

>>48817936
Just playing devil's advocate here.

Why does he need a group of level 1 adventurers to help him in a large-scale quest of ultimate power? Surely there are much better choice to him. You need a more plausible reason than that. Maybe he's superstitious, and one of the player's names is similar to one he saw in a magical vision or divination (just choose one of the players at random). So, he has a sort of passing gut interest in them and sends a minion to test them out in his stead. If they seem promising, he eventually shows up in person later on (obviously still under the guise of a fake ally).

But yeah, make sure you have back-ups in case they kill him. If they do kill him, make him have some sort of journal or object on his person that hints towards them having killed somebody who was more than what he seemed.

>>48817951

This

"Thank you sir knight, but we we've been struck by a great plague for a generation. Dire as our losses have been, we've yet to conquer the battle for our survival.

Legends say this blight has struck upon our land ever since the duke moved over on that castle yonder, but we dare not take a look. If only there was a party strong enough to challenge him!"

>>48818043
Minor Illusion only lasts a minute, it takes at least an hour for conjuration spells to be added to your spell book, while other schools take two hours.
But why even bother playing at this point?

>>48817987
Unless you have keen mind feat for photographic memory (and even then I doubt it's entirely accurate), you would not remember what was on the scroll.

Minor illusion and minor conjuration do not serve as photographic memory banks, Einstein.

>>48818009
Generally DMsG will be much worse in ways of balancing since they won't be playtested nearly as much and have way less feedback, time to develop and people working on it. If I want a good adventure I'll look at the official stuff, maybe third party, or go back to another edition (there are tons of good AD&D2e modules). If they don't have what I want, homebrewing it is easier than going through tons of mediocre shit.

>>48818085

just spam a lot of minor illusions?

or prestidigitate the pages into existance. Technically they have a minor conjuration in them

File: V1L1_Bandits_Nest.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>48818009
I've heard good things about this one

>>48818009

How new are the players?

Every season* of AL has a starter set adventure of 5 mini-missions that are basically just one-room scenarios with some roleplaying interspersed in it. They're pretty handy for newbies who have never played games before because it's short and simple, hardly dangerous because you're going to get a long rest between each session, and will get them almost up a level by the end.

If your players are up for something a little more challenging, then you also have the second set of adventures from each season* that are meant for level 1s and 2s that they could do, and most of the time, they're more heavily Roleplay reliant rather than combat. Especially the one for tyranny of dragons which is 80% murder mystery, and then 20% small dungeon.

If your players are up for a lot of fun, a lot of roleplay, and are intending to get serious, or you think they'd really like it, I 100% recommend the starter set adventure Lost Mines of Phandelver. The intro dungeon is pretty brutal for first players, but the campaign is pretty top notch A+ work.

*The Ravenloft season, however, should be carefully avoided. Written as is, the missions are actually incredibly dangerous. My whole party had to min/max it just to survive several of the encounters.

>>48816257
>>48815451
>>48815302
http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/12/13/a-spell-learned-via-magical-secrets/
you're welcome

>>48818207
They are like new new. One of them has played pathfinder with me... Maybe twice, and another played 5e one time.

I thought about LMoP, but was hesitant. I also thought of the Death House adventure, or maybe the beginning of OoTA.

I know those are lethal, but I thought OoTA would remove the fuss of having to get equipment, and they are the kind of guys that I think would enjoy getting smushed as long as it was just a one shot.

>>48818055
Yeah I get it. I thought about that too. My justification is powerful adventures would be able to discern his true intentions through magic spells and experience. Adventurers who show promise but are still green might be easier to deceive . Hence why he wants to test them. He's cunning, deceptive and has been beaten in the past and seeks revenge. He knows he is weak so he needs power. I also want to make a villain who wants fame and another villain who wants money. Is it a good idea to even make a reluctant villain. Have a situation like Zuko. Where someone is evil but with potential to turn into an ally?

>>48809255
I just realized looking at this pic, that lion's legs are all wrong. Is it not a lion? Like a lion-taur or something?

(in before old school Wemics)

>>48818301
I actually recommend LMoP then. If you're worried about equipment, force them to use the pregens that come with it. It's actually better if they do, the characters are heavily tied into the adventure right from the get go. Fuck, the box even comes with a set of dice and a basic rulebook to boot. You literally just have to pop that shit open, get some pencils, and you're ready to go go go.

>>48809255
Polymorphed a party member into a tyrannosaurus slaved to our Wizard's will (The Wizard had cast Dominate on them because we all decided that it was the quickest way around a plot thing). Wizard later had it throw me into a building.

>>48818320
The whole picture is off if you look closely. The lion's anatomy is jacked up and the knight's armor is ridiculous. C'mon OP, step it up.

>>48818024
It wouldn't work, I have tottally different plans for this adventure.

>>48818038
Hahaha pretty much this.

What would someone fiercely nationalistic be on the alignment chart?

The country in question isn't any more evil or good than your typical fantasy kingdom, since patriotic types always seem to end up as Captain America or Super Hitler depending on what the writer thinks of the country. I mean from a more grounded perspective.

Right now I'm going with flat Neutral, though Lawful Neutral might be a better fit.

>>48818320
The hind knees are also not correct, if it's meant to be a lion, and there's way too much fur on its legs. I think it's meant to be a horse/lion hybrid, especially with the hooves.

>>48818401
It's clearly a Space Marine from an AU where instead of the Space Wolves going full retard with their animal theme it was the Dark Angels who took their boss's name too literally.

>>48818428
Lawful Neutral since he believes in his country's code of law above all.

>>48818428
Lawful neutral I think. Cap is definitely lawful good, hitler is more towards lawful evil since he puts his own ideology in focus.

>>48818416
>It wouldn't work, I have tottally different plans for this adventure.
You mean it would work, but you want your players to see _your_ vision. Honestly, don't get stuck up in your ways. Whatever you have planned, especially after the poor roleplay you performed, is going to probably come off as shitty anyways.

You're a new DM, right? You're going to learn this lesson early on then, but you should bite the bullet and just change the adventure and scrap whatever you had planned, or at the least re-purpose it. It's not only good practice for later, your players will enjoy it more.

File: 1424816100232.jpg (36KB, 390x340px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 390x340px

>>48818453
>Using 40K art to start a D&D thread

>>48818520
I partially agree. Changing everything to make players right isn't good. But if you roleplay something in a weird way, changing the thing itself de facto so that it's not longer weird, makes sense. And sometimes players will obsess over details or focus on something you didn't really think over too much or you know it's nothing really, and then it's usually good to change it and make it be something more to not waste time and effort. It doesn't seem like it's that needed here, you can easily justify it a la >>48817951.

>>48818591
>de facto
Derp, meant after the fact.

File: bc639be6c6d3d12e5d6c3d7bed57ddf6.jpg (29KB, 236x341px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 236x341px

How can I play a warlock so I don't piss off the rest of the party?

>>48818312
Sure, that's fine. I always like villains that can be reasoned with. If you can't talk with a villain and convince them of anything, they just feel like evil trope set piece robots.

>>48818428
Lawful Neutral. They have a patriotic code and will obviously follow the laws of the country they hold so dear. Moreover, they are more concerned with their country's well-being than with what's right or wrong.

Killing is wrong, but killing in service of your country is often considered heroism.

>>48817993
The irony is that I'm actually annoyingly optimistic. However I was expressing what it could seem like from their perspective. Much as they may be broken up over the loss of the children, they have to push on in hopes that the next children will survive.

>>48818520
The problem is that I want to do a mix of alien/medieval campaign, and it's a alien that is kidnaping the children, it doesn't matter really how they find the alien or what they do, I don't want to change the essence of the adventure.

>>48818710
I'll try to do something like that, it seems convincing.

>>48818741
BTW: I was thinking and maybe a good way to solve it is that the alien is using some tech to weaken the mind of the villagers.

>>48818741
>>48818783
Or, why not just have the villagers BE the aliens in disguise? Maybe they've taken over the parents, and that's where the kids are going? Maybe the aliens find magic fascinating, so they're sacrificing the human kids to study magic's secrets?

>>48818825
Well my original idea is that one scout alien is making experiments with the children in order to discover how they dna could be changed so the aliens could disguise themselves as people of that planet.

After they find this scout and deal with it the aliens will give up this stealth approach and will launch a full scale invasion with starships that can make dragons and stuff like that.

File: 1463381484168.png (15KB, 428x506px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 428x506px

>>48818672

>>48818672
Don't be an evil douche?

>>48818672
Don't do stupid things to piss off the party? Your class has nothing to do with how you act.

File: 1468307687866.png (393KB, 647x497px) Image search: [Google]

393KB, 647x497px

What kind of check would it be if the group wanted to ask around to learn / gather information?

File: 1450681989974.jpg (158KB, 1280x989px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 1280x989px

>>48818672

Archfey: Fey don't need to be evil generally, pick Titania or something.
Fiend: You're stealing fiendish magic through some WoW-tier shit and using it for good.
Old One: You're siphoning power off from something that will literally never come up in the campaign.
Undying: You can't really raise undead until like 11th level so unless you tell the party you use ghost magic or whatever they will just think you are any other caster but with a good cantrip.

Alternatively, disregard the party, worship Asmodeus, and ruin everything.

>>48818958
I have used investigation, but I can imagine persuasion working.... That said I can imagine that most people here would prefer to actually have the players ask around and investigate.

>>48818958
In previous editions, there was a "Gather Information" skill based on Charisma, so I'd make it a Charisma check.

However, I tend to go pretty roleplay heavy and avoid fast-forwarding through "I look around for rumors" thing and let it develop more naturally.

I'm a new player and I've been fiddling around with choosing a class and I feel like I've definitely settled on playing a spellcaster type character. I'm kind of at a loss for words and I was wondering if I could get some handholding with choosing a class and picking spells and stuff.
I want to have fun but I also want to be effective, any advice for a new player?

>>48818958

The PHB directly states it's the investigation skill.

>>48819087
There are numerous guides to help figure out how to build the caster once you know what you want. The big question, then, is what do you want out of a caster?

>>48819101

>High CHA / Low INT

>>48819087

Do you want to go full spellcaster, or a class that also uses spells? If you're a first time player, spellcasting can be a little daunting at times. That having been said, I've seen plenty of first time players do fine with spellcasters.

There are a few classes that get spells, but don't have as large a focus on them as, say, the Wizard or Druid.

>>48818958

It's Investigation (Inteligence)

But depending on the sort of town, you can run with Investigation (Charisma) to get the townies to trust you with their tourist free nooks, or Investigation (Wisdom) to find the store no one talks about, but they all go in and out looking in all directions wearing nothing but trench coats and carrying suspicious dildo shaped packages under their elbows

You can even run silly things like Investigation (Constitution) to see if you have the stamina to stay in the market all day looking for the one fucking stall you need before you get the fuck up with all the fishmongers and lines

>>48810704

>Took Crossbow expert at level 1
>Class dipping
>Realize it's going to be a fucking century before I ever get to have CrossExpert, Sharpshooter, and fucking Alert.

Christ.

>>48819117
I'd like to have elements of utility but be able to hold my own in a fight.
>>48819154
I'd really like to go full spellcaster. I really think I would enjoy the playstyle.
I was looking at wizard and sorcerer, but I saw everyone talking about bards and that got me interested in that.

>BBEG shows up to taunt the players
>dragonborn insults and interrupts her while she tries to talk to another PC
>summons some vines around the dragonborn's maw to shut her up
>wtf no save?
>right str save
>failure
>wow then you go and make it a dc 18!
Sometimes I don't get where the fuck they get those ideas, I never state DCs ever.

I’m kinda having a dilemma right now. I’m making a small quest for my players. In it they have to retrieve an item for a tower in a set amount of turns. The problem is that I want to put in encounters that are above their level. Not impossible, just not likely. The idea is that they have to run passed them and retrieve the item while not getting killed.
The problem is that I feel like I’m going to kill them and it will feel like a cheap death. Granted they don’t have to do it or anything, but still.
Is there any way I could avoid it or should I just lower the monsters level?

>>48819214
>>48819117
Maybe I answered the question wrong, and fundamentally misunderstood what was asked.

>>48819214

Bards aren't a bad choice. Have you looked at Warlock at all? I always suggest Warlock to newer players, their spells are much simpler to manage but you can still get the feeling of playing a full spellcaster.

File: 1470008750535.jpg (170KB, 751x1100px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 751x1100px

>>48818958
Charisma (Investigation)

>>48811556

Depending on the situation, our DM rolls a "misfortune die" based off a coin flip. Heads is damage, and tails is status effect.

We've had an assassin throw dust of choking and sneezing at a caravan we were escorting, but he rolled a one, so we had advantage on our saving throw on it because the assassin was coughing and fucking loud and we all saw him coming with perception anyway.

Needless to say he died fast.

Other enjoyable moments.

>Enemy throws dart
>Rolls 1 - status effect wins
>Dart lands square in the enemy's own eye due to a recoil off of a local metal surface and the ground. Target is blinded.

>Enemy archers
>3 of their bows strings snap back to back
>One of them hits themselves in the eye with their fist and takes 5 damage.

That was a hellish first battle. DM might have been being nice to us.

>>48819246
to be honest, I havent looked at warlock.
I have the players handbook and i just got all the resources from the OP(which I just shared with my DM, By the way, excellent fucking thread, excellent OP, really top quality shit)
So I'll flip through it later. I was really looking more at wizard though, they seem to have a lot of utility and I would really like to see where that goes.

File: 1441459332965.jpg (189KB, 722x850px) Image search: [Google]

189KB, 722x850px

Question: Say I attack with a greatsword, and roll 2d6 for damage, if either die lands on a 1 or a 2 and I have great weapon fighting, do i reroll one or both dice?

>>48819214

Sorcerer is a great option for a beginner.

It doesn't overwhelm you with strategic planing, like the wizard does, lets you have quite the punch in a battle, and your casting stat is charisma, which allows you for some decent options in social interaction, and they're not only sturdier, but also much easier than the bard to correct the build as you level up.

Bards are hands down my favorite class, but they do require some finesse. On another hand, while a sorcerer fuck up might hurt your party, a bardic fuck up will just waste every one's time.

Sorc for the DPS, Bard or Cleric for the support, maybe spend a session or two with each class, and see which one you like best for yourself

>>48819243
i would just do monsters they CAN beat, and strip them of their weapons and armor somehow so they will feel more likely to run past/avoid encounters. or some such.

>>48819343
You can reroll either of the dice, thus why GWF is generally better for the 2d6 weapons than the 1d10/1d12 weapons.

>>48819343
you reroll a die that lands on 1 or 2.
so if you roll 1 and 6 you reroll just the 1, and if you roll 1 and 2 you reroll both.

>>48819243

Don't make it a red line deadline

Make it an "hourglass" challenge. As time ticks, more and more shit keeps happening. Ground shaking, rocks dropping, monsters who had harder levels start running away in the oposite direction to them