/5eg/ Fifth Edition General - Dance Party Edition

So getting back to the tool feats from UA...the Burglar fear always bothered me since it didn't really do anything special. While I understand the logic behind it, Thieves' Tools being more useful than most if not all other tools in the game, it just didn't "feel" right to me.

Does this seem like a small enough effect, then, to tack on to it?

>• Whenever you use thieves’ tools to attempt to disarm a trap, you do not spring the trap unless you fail by 5 or more.

you think you get to make the general, huh punk kid?

you better think again

What are the worst classes, archetypes, and feats in 5e?

If you were to make four characters, picking the worst options every time (except for dumb shit that didn't make sense, like weapon master on a wizard and shit) how bad would the resulting party be?

Better or worse than if you did the same in previous editions? And more or less balanced between characters?

>>48968211
It's a decent little effect to attach to the feat imo yeah

File: Android_17_(DBZ).jpg (30KB, 184x480px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 184x480px

>>48968213
The question isn't whether or not I can. The question is who's going to stop me.

Warlocks are best.

>>48968228
most of the 'weaker' subclasses depend entirely on the DM

The two I see people complain about all the time are:

Way of the 4 Elements Monk because they can cast 2/3 spells before having to take a short rest

Beastmaster Ranger because their subclass feature can be killed in a single hit and requires DM cooperation and Mercy to thrive

>>48968228
bladelock for sure

you'd be better off just casting eldritch blast

File: 1470980158760.png (32KB, 684x940px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 684x940px

>playing curse of strahd
>playing great old one warlock
>party goes to yester hill
>my patron (kezef) wants me to retrieve the spear that is located there and sacrifice it
>fighter finds it first
>I say that my life depends on that spear
>he doesn't give it to me
>roll for it
>lose
>Out of character he does not want to give me the spear ''my character wouldn't do it cause you are evil''
>talk to kezef again
>says I have one more chance, retrieve an item from strahds castle and be rewarded, or don't and I quote ''you will be severely punished''

I'm so fucked, is it too late to become a cleric?

File: yes to please.png (53KB, 776x609px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 776x609px

Anon, how do we fix the Trickster Cleric?
Or has it been fixed already?

>What's wrong with it?

I think the simple fact that you don't actually get to "be" a trickster or to feel like one is quite an issue for the subclass.

The Blessing of the Trickster is good mechanically, but it just is a pretty weak buff that won't fix Stealth's main issue (stealth is almost always impossible to maintain for the party) and will be outclassed by Pass Without a Trace very fast. This situation makes the Blessing very situational.

It's also, as I mentioned, making someone else better at something you should be good at, but without even being able to be good at. A Trickster Cleric cannot even get proficiency in Stealth.

Every single Trickster feature is shit, either because they're objectively underpowered (Cloak of Shadows is a more situational Invisibility) or because they're just plain worse than their counterparts (as you said, poison Divine Strike).

They don't get any Invisibility spells, but their Domain Spells are good. Then again, Domain Spells are always good.

>>48968228
>Worst Class
Ranger. You could remove it and the game wouldn't be missing anything.

>Archetype
Beastmaster. See >>48968304

>Feat
Probably Weapon Master. I don't EVER see someone mention taking it, and I can't think of a character I'd make that would ever NEED to take it.

File: MikeMeralsisafag.png (357KB, 1440x1535px) Image search: [Google]

357KB, 1440x1535px

The more I read tweets and shit from Mike Mearls the more I hate him. Its starting to affect my enjoyment of the game. Could we work on getting him fired. He deserves it, IMO.

>>48968369
>my patron (kezef) wants me to retrieve the spear that is located there and sacrifice it

I keep seeing stuff like this. I've DM'd for years at this point, and surprisingly no one I've ever had played a Warlock outside of one-shot "fun" adventures.

Is it stated somewhere that it's completely okay to Geas-lite a character that because they picked Warlock?

>>48968439
> Firing people for their personal views
Let me guess, you're american

>>48968228
>>48968304
Berserker Barbarians suffer from their main subclass feature giving them levels of fatigue, and fatigue being absolutely brutal this edition, on top of Barbarians generally having low AC with standard array (from being slightly MAD), they're a meatgrinder for essentially 1 minute per day then they suffer out of combat consequences.

Wildmage sorcs when compared to dragonic blood sorcs suck at first glance, because draconics get amazing passive power and wildmagic requires a LOT of DM cooperation (to proc their tides of chaos).

So the party of worst subclasses would be:
Beastmaster
Wild Magic Sorcerer
Berserker
Four Elements Monk

In a DM vs Party style game the BM's animal companion would always die in combat unless the ranger kept it far away from the action, and out of combat if the game doesn't revolve on wilderness exploration the ranger's usefulness would be severely limited.
The Berserker would just be a grinder for 1 minute a day and then would suffer disadvantage on skill checks until a long rest.
The Monk would end up always wanting to sit down and take a breather, casting barely anything and run out of their precious Ki.
And if the DM didn't want to throw the Wildmage a bone, they'd be a vanilla sorc with access to 1 free advantage per long rest.

>>48967222
I've never enjoyed a class more, but it requires your DM to be complicit. Mine will usually trigger it instantly, and we've made the roll 1d10, with the chance of it going off getting higher each roll it doesn't, so I get surges pretty frequently.

When you are getting surges, though, it's amazing.

As I said in another post, I've killed our rangers pet, saved the party from a TPK, got reincarnated, become a manlet before becoming a giant and plenty of other things.
It's the Class of Many Things, and I love it.

What's the actual use of shoving besides preventing an enemy to get to another ally

File: S4hzOYD.jpg (441KB, 1024x989px) Image search: [Google]

441KB, 1024x989px

>>48968286
You typo'd Wild Magic sorcerer

>>48968373
>Domain spells are always good
Poor War clerics beg to differ, almost everything they have requires concentration

The way I've played Trickster Cleric was to Indirectly influence the action, picking up the charletan background for deception and disguise/forgery kit, using Blessing of the trickster to buff NPCs that I'd fooled into doing my dirty work (using fake identities, disguises bribes). Invoke duplicity was used to either overwhelm enemies that got too close to me, or to make it look like I'm helping when I'm actually squatting behind a nearby rock/tree.

>>48968453
It depends on the character, if you openly state ''I perform a ritual and contact my patron'' any good DM would not resist the opportunity to fit it into the story somehow. Although you can go the entire game without contacting your patron and chalk it up to ''my patron let's me do what I want because he/she knows I have potential''

>>48968530
pushing them into nearby pits full of liquid lead

>>48968552
Why isn't there a wild magic warlock yet?

>>48968591
And you could have done this with any other class. As you said, picking the Charlatan background was almost more of a defining point for your character than picking Trickery as a subclass.

If buffing NPC's and faking being useful is the pinnacle of the subclass, maybe something is wrong with it.

Thanks for your very valuable input though. Would you say that the subclass could/should be improved? How would you go about it?

>>48968525
Wild Magic Sorcerer is fun to play with in the party from experience. The only thing is please don't be Le Chaotic Neutral ebin xD version of this character, please. That's true of all classes but Wild Magic almost works in an excuse for it.

>>48968453
I think the PHB does say that sometimes a patron can tell the warlock to go do something. But it's kind of ambiguous about the actual consequences, similar to sentient weapon disagreements.

I think DMs do it just because it's a simple way to add motivation to the character, and lightly railroad the party down a plot.

>>48968457
He deserved to be fired for 4E alone.

>>48968530
You can block an exit so they have to shove you to escape, or you can prevent more enemies from getting inside the room.

>>48968639
If I could alter the class I'd probably make their divine strike players choice between poison or necrotic, just so three quarters of enemy mobs aren't immune to your compensatory damage buff.

Give them either a skill or cantrip (minor illusion/sending) at level 1 on top of their Blessing

I'd also give the option to spend 2 channel divinity uses at once to extend Invoke Duplicity to last 10 minutes, so it can be used for out of combat scenarios, like having your copy address people whilst you stay disguised within a crowd.

File: wind turbine smoke fire.gif (2MB, 450x247px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 450x247px

Currently deciding on one of two Eldritch Knight builds.

One is a greatsword, great weapon fighter. Less AC but lets me use full plate, once I get hold of it. Also harder hitting since 2d6+mod > 1d8+mod.

One is a DEX build, better initiative and AC early on and super late but largely irrelevant since mirror image is a thing. The other advantage is that it will let me hit more reliably with spell cantrips. Will probably go Warcaster with a shield, maybe pick up Shield Master. I'm also leaning towards taking the fighting style that lets me impose disability with my shield on people in combat if they don't attack me.

Thoughts?

tl;dr DEX eldritch knight or STR eldritch knight?

>>48968755
>If I could alter the class I'd probably make their divine strike players choice between poison or necrotic

That's problematic for two reasons. First, a lot of creature are immune to both. Second, necrotic damage doesn't have much to do with trickery itself. We're not dealing with an "evil" domain per se.
Maybe it should be "magical" damage, as to bypass resistances, and nothing else.

> Give them either a skill or cantrip at level 1 on top of their Blessing
At 1st level, you gain proficiency in one of the following skills of your choice: Acrobatics, Deception, Sleight of Hand or Stealth.
Alternatively, you may choose to gain proficiency with thieves' tools or with the disguise kit.

I like what you came up with Invoke Duplicity. I still think both the Blessing and this feature should be thrown away, they are pretty garbage.

>>48968714
>>48968608
Interesting. That's something I do in general, whenever pretty much any character prays to their chosen god or asks for guidance / help.

D100 with a 1% chance of something happening (if they are not a cleric).

>>48968775
The protective fighting style only works on attacks that aren't aimed at you.

With a greatsword and heavy armour you can freely dump dex, so the dex build doesn't really let you hit higher with cantrips.

Looking at AC maxings you could get, Greatsword guy could get a max of 18+1 (plate & defensive), and Dexguy gets 15+2+2+1 (half-plate & Dexmod & Shield & Defensive), to it's only 1 AC difference at the end of the day.

The most important thing is which concept you find more interesting

>>48968404
Beastmaster is bad but Hunter is a fine class. It deals out decent sustained damage in combat while being fairly safe due to range and resilient due to hit dice + medium armour and shields. They also provide the normal utility of ranger tracking and difficult terrain traversing

>>48968319
But a bladelock casting eldritch blast is still doing better than a beastmaster ranger.

>>48968439
You should probably not judge game designers based on their political beliefs, just like you shouldn't judge Michael Jackson music based on his sexuality.

>>48968530
Depends on your DM's combat design. If you fight in generic rectangular dungeon rooms, nothing. If there are interesting terrain features (bonfires, spikes, bottomless chasms), it can be the best move ever.

>>48968830
95 monsters are immune to poison in the MM
only 11 are immune to necrotic, but I see your point on the evil powers thing. So maybe Poison or Force damage, player's choice (similar to nature domain).

I still really like Invoke Duplicity, and feel like it's just a small tweak from being perfect.

>>48968906
Technically the dex guy would eventually just switch to full plate anyway and could have 18 + 2 + 1, which is higher by 2. +1 might not feel like a lot, but in 5e you're going to feel +2.

>>48969014
You need 15 str to wear full plate, which means you'll me fairly MAD if you're relying on cantrips for your ranged option. (INT, DEX, CON, STR), and dumpstatting WIS is never a good plan in 5e.

>>48968775

Strength build will do more damage because of GWM, but Dex build will probably have a shield and therefore more HP. It's up to you, though I'm personally a fan of Dex classes I suppose.

I'd take Dueling fighting style though, since the +2 damage will add up well.

Since you should eventually get 20 Dex you might want to grab the Magic Initiate feat and get Mage Armor, since Mage Armor and 5 Dex is the same as full plate. It'll only be outdone by magic light armor later in the game.

>>48969014
>>48969058
And by using a great weapon over a shield you wont need to pick up the war caster feat, but then again +3 magical shields are a thing, which is a big deal.

>>48968163
Dropped a chandelier on a group of enemies while they were already stuck in damaging effects from our casters.

I freaked out some succubi by negating all of their tactics by analyzing and telling the party exactly how to defeat them, causing them to flee.

>>48969058
Oh right, I tend to forget about Str requirements for armor. Haven't had to deal with them personally so I'm stuck in an older mentality.

>>48969091
The existence of shields with pluses really irks me. It goes against the 5e capping principles and also means that in a high-magic world nobody would ever, ever use a two-handed weapon.

Then again, 5e is really geared towards low-magic worlds, so it's not a big cause for practical concern.

>>48968922
What does a Hunter do that a druid or fighter or bard casting Swift Quiver doesn't do better?

>>48969243
Colossus Slayer is a Hell of a thing, or at least that's been my personal experience.

>>48968530
Shove them prone so other allies get advantage

>>48968530
Pushing them into a bonfie spell or pit.

What is the best cleric domain, and what is the worst?

File: Defender.png (190KB, 345x500px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 345x500px

>>48969145
Well, you can always make a Defender version of a two handed weapon.

>>48969297
>Best
They are all good.

Arcana lets you be a high level wizard along with being a cleric.

Life just overloads those heals.

War lets you be a better pally than the pally.

Tempest lets you play "Thundrrstrike" all day.

Death makes you better at making things deadder.

>>48969310
But then you'd take a -3 to attack and damage (well, -2 to damage, because your weapon is bigger) compared to one-handed weapons just to have the same AC.

No, one-handed is a clear winner here.

>>48969243
For most campaigns (that don't run beyond level 8), A hunter Ranger can pull off an attack, with hunter's mark and colossus slayer, which is DAMN GOOD, and few other level 3-4 classes can match that output.

What are some good ways to deal with spells such as Detect Thoughts in a mystery style campaign?

I'm running a sandbox game with a lot going on and several characters with ulterior motives , the odd murder mystery, noble intrigue and all that good stuff. While I don't want to give the entire game away due to one spell I also want player spells to have their value and uses so don't want to cockblock that shit by arbitarily giving everyone rings of mind shielding etc.

>>48969493
Give enemy NPCs proficiency in Wisdom saving throws and decent wisdom scores

>>48969145
In a world with +3 shields, a +3 animated shield isn't too much of a stretch and lets you use a 2-handed weapon.

>>48969535
What level would you even get hold of this stuff? How much would they cost?

>>48969493
Don't use purely humanoid characters. Things like doppelgangers and rakshasas have innate protection from such spells.

>>48969567
Whatever level the DM says. Whatever cost the DM says. 5e doesn't really lay out concrete info about that like older editions.

>>48969297
Knowledge. Expertise, proficiency with any skill or tool, reading minds followed by a Suggestion without using a spell slot that can recharge on a short rest, it is awesome for non-combat stuff!

War is the worst. Not for combat, but the fact that you are literally nothing but combat!

>>48969593
and the majority of their domain spells involve concentration

>>48969567
+3 stuff is more what you are getting at 15+...

>>48969610
Hooray! I get that it has some useful things, but it's so... bland.

>>48968228

Ranger is absolute shit. Mearls hates rangers because they remind him of how his fat ass doesn't go outside, so he nerfs the fuck out of them.

Monk is also pretty shitty, because again, they remind Merals of being a fat fuck.

Weapon Master is a HUGE load of crap. Ironically a wizard is probably the only fucking class to benefit from it.

That new feat that gave +1 to attack rolls in UA, that shit is disgusting.

All the feats suck, to be honest. Most of them are so badly balanced that they literally have to give attribute bonuses to be viable.

Champion fighter archetype is pretty gay. It also brings back the stupid-ass 19-20 critical shit from 3.5. Which was fine but if you're going to simplify the game don't confuse the "20 is a crit" and "20 is an autohit" narrative where people thought longswords auto-hit on a 19.

And don't give me that "lol well if you read the rules it makes perfect sense" shit because that was true of 3.5, too, because people often confused even the most clearly written rules because they were fucking newfags to the game.

Warlock is also shite by the way.

>>48968286

No, they are shite cancer that should have died with 3.5.

>>48968369

You deserve it for playing an edgelord class (warlock)

>>48969145
+X shields and armor don't have to exist if you don't want them to. 5e doesn't force any such thing to exist and they tend to screw up encounter balance badly.

I learned my lesson after several campaigns not to screw with bounded accuracy.

File: ragez.gif (490KB, 499x374px) Image search: [Google]

490KB, 499x374px

>>48968457

Actually, he needs to be fired for his GAME DESIGN views. Acting like background mechanics and advantage are new ideas is retarded as shit. He isn't a game designer, he just picks and choosing shit from other games to tack onto his retarded system. I am 90% sure he has never looked at any non-biased RPG design forum in his life. If he spent some time even in our /gdg/ threads his eyes would be opened. The /gdg/ homebrew faggots whose projects will never see the light of day, are better at game design than this nigger. He doesn't come up with any original ideas and hides in a fucking echo chamber. He hasn't "designed" anything since 3.5, and even Tome of Battle was a literal "martials should be 1-9 casters" to fix martial-caster imbalance..... by turning martials into casters. This followed into 4e where he did the same thing. Instead of coming up with an effective way of balancing casters and martials, he just blended them together into the same boring-ass mush.

With 5e he just went back to 3.5 and ripped off random shit and made up mechanics without even thinking about them. His design goals and design choices literally contradict each other: i.e. with "bounded accuracy", ability score caps, and a +2 every 4 levels (or less for fighter) to ability scores. All because of the instant gratification he is inserting to draw in new players who want it to be as gratifying as Pokemon Go or whatever reward-center-brain-triggering bullshit they play these days. That's why the XP system is fucktarded and level advancement makes no mathematical sense, it's just numbers Merals pulled out of his ass because he wants everyone to level up after the 1st session. Why? Because the new players in the hobby these days are fucking cancer who would quit if they didn't get gibsmedats after playing for five fucking minutes.

Go back to Dark Souls, you fucking sons of bitches.

File: image.jpg (69KB, 496x750px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 496x750px

>>48968373
Trickster Clerics aren't meant to be arcane tricksters anon.
They aren't rogues, they deceive and manipulate, not stealth and gank.
Think a messer rather than a DPS.

>>48968530

D&D players, everyone! They are so incapacitated by their autistically restrictive rules system that they need help from other players on a Mongolian chalkboard to figure out interesting uses for PUSHING someone.

This is because D&D combat is boring as fuck.

Which is ironic from a game all about COMBAT COMBAT COMBAT.

Merals claims D&D's three pillars are exploration interaction and combat. But guess which ones has by FAR the most mechanics associated with it?

It's a wargame. Nothing else.

>>48969310

> bounded accuracy edition
> flat +3 to attack rolls

Hypocrisy at its finest.

>>48969346
>Death makes you better at making things deadder.

So does playing a fighter, idiot.

>>48969567

Well it's a very rare magic item that can only be crafted at level 11 by RAW so around then is when I'd hand it out.

As an aside it does annoy me that the rules don't give any concrete guidelines for this sort of thing so I'm left pissing in the dark. I'm aware 3.5 went too far in the opposite direction but I buy RPG books so I don't have to think about rules, not so it can just be hand waved and it's not as if magic items aren't a massive part of the game and always kind of have been, if not inherently neccesary anymore for the math to work.

>>48969760
>Literally the highest possible bonus from an official magic weapon, Very Rare if alone or Legendary if in addition to other bonuses
Yes, and? Your level 7 fighter doesn't get to go down to WizMart and compare prices on name brand and generic +3 Bastard Clubs of Zeal.

>>48969749
Calm down
Take a breath

>>48969653
>>48969724
>>48969749
>>48969760
Well damn, I guess 5e is terrible, perhaps you should, I don't know, not play it or come into threads discussing it. That would be an idea wouldn't it.

>>48969822
Where would he get his daily recommended allowance of (You)s from?

File: Screen-Shot-2014-07-04-at-10.25.48-AM.png (52KB, 327x153px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 327x153px

>>48969822
>Well damn, I guess 5e is terrible

Correct. Actually, not correct. 5e is a decent game. However, if you shoot randomly at a dartboard, some of your shots are going to hit. Merals is such a fucking retard he can barely comphrehend what he is designing. I'd give good money for 20 minutes with that fucker, assuming I had time to prepare. I'd grill the shit out of him and see if he can actually answer my fucking questions. Probably can't, he's too busy putting shit like pic related in the Player's Handbook to actually design a competent game.

>>48969897
>a single paragraph explaining there is no -4 STR and if you want you can think about your character's gender and sexual preferences
yes, I expect writing this took probably the majority of the dev team's time and the entire rest of the rulebook was an afterthought

>>48969822

For example, because I accidentally hit enter before I finished my thought:

Good things about 5e:

> proficiency bonus
> bounded accuracy (in concept not execution)
> finesse weapons (for attack bonus not damage)
> feats doing more than one thing
> RARE magic items

BAD ideas

> hit dice (same stupid structured healing bullshit as 4e)
> short rest horse crap
> keeping vancian magic when 4e's spellcasting system was objectively better
> ASIs
> feats replacing ASIs and sucking so much ass they had to provide ASIs to be useful
> dumb-ass class features like action surge
> ranger being a piece of shit
> bringing back favored enemy for ranger
> no NPC classes
> no unified system for building NPCs
> having fuck-all for feats because Merals can't understand modular design
> drow as a fucking CORE RACE
> +2/+1 ASI at first level for most races which clashes with the 20 cap even more

>>48969941

Apparently not since there was an entire Mary Sue interview about it. This part was more important to Merals than the rest of the book, because for him, game design is about virtue signalling. That's why the game is dumbed down and XP advancement is far easier (even though he made 1st level play fucking shit just so he'd have an excuse for his instant gratification bullshit).

http://www.themarysue.com/basic-rules-dnd/

Serious question: why have poison damage when there's already necrotic? Doesn't it amount to basically the same thing? Aren't many things immune to one also immune to the other? Would changing everything related to poison into necrotic break anything?

>>48969955
no

>>48969955
>> drow as a fucking CORE RACE
Anon why would they not be?
They're almost always put in a PHB or another, or there' some rules out there to make one.
Plus they have the nifty new subrace rules.
Of course it makes sense to put drow in the PHB, because it lines up perfectly.
Now, why Dragonborn don't have a subrace selection is beyond me. The two races that lacked it, Tieflings and Half-elves, got options rather quickly.

>>48969653
Who was he, anon?

>>48969667
I perfectly agree. In my campaign, the legendary artifact sought by the heroes since the first adventure had a +1 enchantment on it, because anything else would've made its wielder completely OP.

The problem is that I don't know if other DMs and modules will have the same opinion, which is reinforced by fa/tg/uys and ca/tg/irls who theorycraft +3/+3/+3 characters.

I'm gonna be DMing a 5e game for the first time, would it be unbalanced to just give everyone a feat at first level? Waiting until level 4 seems kinda boring for something that helps define a characters role a bit better.

>>48970034

Standard 5fag argument, everyone! It's just "wah wah wah I like it because it's good and at least it's not 3.5/4e so fuck you."

They argue on the level of children.

Yet they still can't explain the +2 ASIs every four or less levels, ALONG WITH the pro-equality all-bonus-no-penalty racial modifiers (because god forbid the orc wizard's save DC is 5% less) ALONG WITH the high starting scores.

You could solve this with:

> +1 to two scores as the only ASI option

B-but, muh instant gratification!!

> Removing the ability cap

B-but, muh bounded accuracy

> Actual racial penalties

B-but, muh racial equality! STOP OPPRESSING ME SHITLORD.

People act like Orc Wizards and Dwarf Bards weren't viable in 3.5, that was only because of the fucking "need a 13 to cast 3rd level spells" requirement that 5e removed. Along with bonus spells.

>>48969996
I feel as though necrotic is tied to negative energy, in the same way that radiant is positive energy.
However, if your interpretation of exposure to negative energy is "flesh damaging" then it should be fine to convert poison to it. Doesn't that one level 8 spell in EE deal necrotic damage by sucking the water from things? Abudabi's Horrid Wilting or something?

>>48969760
> bounded accuracy edition
> flat +3 to attack rolls
> Hypocrisy at its finest.

I don't think you understand what bounded accuracy means. It just means that +Xs are relatively rare, difficult to acquire en masse, and can be acquired in a predictable way, and as a result the likely modifier a player has to an attack roll is easily predictable and therefore easy to balance around.

Note that a Defender weapon, being a Legendary item, doesn't show up until Magic Item Table I, which a GM doesn't even start rolling on until he's making the party face CR 17 monsters, i.e., until the average party level is 17 (and earlier the Magic Item Rarity table explicitly identifies Legendary items as something that should be held in reserve until level 17 as well). Bounded accuracy, then, simply means that the game assumes that it is possible that by level 17 a player might have access to a Defender weapon, and therefore balances monsters around that possibility.

File: 1418853592115.jpg (73KB, 500x640px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 500x640px

>>48970099

>>48969775
>handing out +3 animated shield at level 11
I'm going to assume you are joking because otherwise I'd have to commit sudoku

5e isn't handwaving anything, it has the same exact magic item philosophy as 1e and 2e: magic items are rare as balls, especially ones with pluses. A character can go an entire career without finding more than 1 or 2, and that's okay. No class needs any magic items to function.

Besides, the DMG does give you random treasure charts, so I don't really know what you're complaining about anyway.

>>48970097
I do some pretty crazy magic weapons and armor, just nothing that touches on attack rolls, AC, or saves directly.

I don't mind giving out a an axe that critically hits on a 19 (or 18 for a champion fighter) that deals an extra die of damage on a critical hit as an uncommon magic item. You were going to hit on an 18 most likely anyway.

>>48970035
>They're almost always put in a PHB or another, or there' some rules out there to make one.

They are in the Monster Manual as an optional race.

Yes, people have been playing them for years. But the DM could always say no because it's in the Monster Manual. NOW it's in the core book and the players feel entitled to play it. Don't give me that DM veto shit, because I have gotten shit for banning drow whereas I never did before. Player brought it up repeatedly in game as a snipe comment until I threatened to kick him the fuck out of my house. Same with the gender rules, I had some tranny decide it was okay to bring her sexuality front and center stage "because the book said so" even though I told her/him/it/whateverthefuck that I didn't want that shit in my game.

> Plus they have the nifty new subrace rules.

Yeah those are fucking gay. Like I didn't have enough races to keep track of, now I have to differentiate between high elves and wood elves? At the very least make high elf the default and assume elf means high elf. I mean really, Hill dwarves and Mountain dwarves? WHO GIVES A FUCK???

> Of course it makes sense to put drow in the PHB, because it lines up perfectly.

No it doesn't, it's in there because RA Salvatore is now a corporate whore and he is bound in chains. I got to meet him and he looked dead inside. Wizards, and more specifically Mearls, has raped the shit out of him. I fucking hate Merals so much. Even more, though, I hate the fucking edgelords who play drow so much more too. I hope the exacto knife slips one day. I wish I could be there to watch it.

File: 1437364849546.jpg (125KB, 781x890px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 781x890px

>>48970098

Yes, it would, because the feats are complete shit.

> Waiting until level 4 seems kinda boring for something that helps define a characters role a bit better.

I completely agree!!! However, Merals decided to pander to grognards in 5e and thus he made feats optional so as to pander to an OSR mindset. Ignoring the fact that OSR fans are already playing their own games and don't give a shit about fifth edition.

A feat every four levels (including 1st) along with a +1 ASI would be perfectly fine. Especially without bonus feats.But Merals doesn't believe in character customization, he believes your chargen freedom should be restricted to the shitton of shitty class features he dumps on you, so you can track a ton of once-per-rest abilities and other shit that you'll probably forget because it doesn't really matter.

At least 3.5 had feats to make up for the shitty class features. 5e doesn't even have that, it's near impossible to make an interesting character, because Merals has outright said he wants to decrease the interestingness of character creation to focus more on "in-game" discussion. So basically endless nat20 lulz stories. Yeah, fuck you Merals. Fuck character builds, because what you SHOULD be building is a unique sexuality for your dark, edgy, sensitive drow warlock.

Fuck 5e.

>>48970099
>People act like Orc Wizards and Dwarf Bards weren't viable in 3.5, that was only because of the fucking "need a 13 to cast 3rd level spells" requirement that 5e removed.

That is not why orc wizards and dwarf bards weren't viable in 3.5.

The issue was that other races were just objectively better. The dwarf bard, no matter how hard he tried, was always going to be 5% worse than a human bard kitted out otherwise the same (and 10% worse than a drow bard or other race with a +2 Charisma) at the thing that mattered to his class - which was spell save DCs, not spell levels. It was, on paper and in practice, a suboptimal choice.

By capping the various ability scores at 20 in 5E, it means that even though the dwarf bard might start off worse than the drow bard, the dwarf bard can eventually reach a point of mechanical equality at the thing that his class is intended to do. It takes a little longer and requires a little more dedication, but the end result is parity.

>>48969955
>bounded accuracy
Works, compared with 3e and 4e the number bloat is nonexistent. Remember when you had to provide every character a +X weapon/implement at set levels in order to not break the game's scaling? Remember when ACs got up to 30, 40 or even 50 if you optimised hard? Not any more, it all works fine.

>finesse weapons
Necessary to prevent half if not most classes being MAD or just useless in melee and limited by the best weapon being 1d8 and needing martial proficiency. Fine as is.

>hit dice
Mean that not every party needs a cleric or wand of cure light wounds, mean an adventuring day can actually last long enough for people to use all their resources - in fact, I don't even understand what your problem with it is, because it's a good addition. If it's too 'gamey' for you then I invite you to look at the 'G' in 'RPG'.
>short rests
Same thing. What's so unbearable about the idea of having a breather letting someone get back on their feet? It provides a balancing tool for abilities by having a mid-point in power and usability between at-will and daily features. How could you possibly manage things like superiority dice, ki points and Warlock spell slots without some mid-adventuring-day restore point?

>Vancian magic
I agree it's outdated, but given this was throwback edition it was obviously going to be in. Yes, there has to be some better way but this is tried and true and everyone knows it's how D&D works.

>ASIs and feats
Once again, what? I don't understand what you're objecting to here. ASIs balance character progression by some classes having more than others, and feats provide alternatives to raw stat increases with new abilities. Some new abilities are powerful enough to be worth a whole extra modifier point (GWF, Sharpshooter, Alert) some are not (Athletic, Keen Mind).

>action surge
What? An extra action, what's wrong with that?

(Cont, regretfully)

>>48970098
>would it be unbalanced to just give everyone a feat at first level?

Not really, but if you do don't allow variant humans. Two feats at first level *would* be overpowered.

>>48970098
It's probably fine. But make sure everyone takes a feat and not ability score bonuses.

>>48969996
Necrotic (and radiant) damage, as I see them, are more than physical. They have a component that affects the soul, either overcharging (radiant) it or draining it (necrotic). They have a strong connection with divine forces, which gives them a reason to exist.

>>48970163
Have you never played a game older than 4e? Subraces were ALWAYS a thing, even if there was a default. 2e had entire manuals full of subraces. I get it that you don't like them, but don't pretend they're a shitty new invention.

>>48970099
What are you even doing in this thread? We wouldn't be here if we didn't enjoy 5e, so you're almost certainly wasting your breath. Go back to whatever general appeals to you and stop telling us we're having fun wrong.

File: OafishToothpasteKick.png (31KB, 730x290px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 730x290px

>>48970213
>hates 5e
>comes into 5e thread complaining it doesn't cater to him

>>48970239
>ranger
Yeah it's a problem, but given that no one is really sure what the design space of a ranger is anyway it was pretty inevitable. The succession of patch attempts were a little embarrassing too. Perhaps ranger was just never meant to be, I mean it's not like most of its kit couldn't be packaged as feats and left for the Fighter to pick up with its spare ASIs.

>no NPC classes
Fucking good. If the players aren't going to fight an NPC there's no reason to make a stat block. If the players are going to fight an NPC use the same rules you would for a monster, as spelled out (admittedly in a jumbled manner) in the DMG. Class levels can and should be reserved for player characters.

>fuck-all for feats
There are quite a lot, and the design makes it easy to add more. And weren't you just complaining about their existence anyway?

>drow as a core race
Personal taste, ban them if it bothers you so much

>+2/+1 ASI
Highest point buy stat you can get at level 1 is 17, it takes at least until level 8 to reach 20, neglecting your other stats completely and having reached your peak in your most important stat by mid game seems perfectly reasonable - and if you choose not to it's only a single point difference in the modifier.

Basically it's a fine and functional game and your bitching and moaning won't stop that being so, or stop me or anyone else running and enjoying games with it. Leave this thread if it triggers you so much.

>>48970341
But don't you get it? WE'RE HAVING FUN WRONG!

>>48970253

Alright, thanks bro

>>48970341
>Personal taste, ban them if it bothers you so much

I believe he's already said
> I banned them and people didn't like me.

theresnothingmencandoagainstsuchrecklessfaggotry.png

Just ignore this twat and move on.

File: Consensus Ranger.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>48970341
>Ranger

The ranger's a bit too sacred a cow for me to want to get rid of it entirely. I've become a fan of the consensus ranger, personally.

>>48968469
>requires a LOT of DM cooperation yo proc tides of chaos
Literally what dm wouldn't. My best stories come from that shit
>I cast sleep on the guard tower
>Okay, as the essence floes through your fingers, the metaphorical valve on your magics snaps loose and you have a WILD MAGIC SURGE
>Teleports into the middle of the guard nest simultaneously casting sleep
>Falls asleep and the party has to figure out how to save the poor sap
Literally the best

>>48970237
>the dwarf bard can eventually reach a point of mechanical equality at the thing that his class is intended to do

So there's no fucking point to racial bonuses at all then.

Everyone just levels all their fucking scores to 20 and ends up the exact same.

Now, not to move the goalposts, but I personally think ASIs were a fucking mistake to have in D&D in the first place. For mostly this exact reason.

>>48970239
>Mean that not every party needs a cleric or wand of cure light wounds, mean an adventuring day can actually last long enough for people to use all their resources - in fact, I don't even understand what your problem with it is, because it's a good addition. If it's too 'gamey' for you then I invite you to look at the 'G' in 'RPG'.

It's a dissociated mechanic and it's also more bookkeeping. It's Reserve points except even more fucking retarded than those were.

>>48970270
>Have you never played a game older than 4e? Subraces were ALWAYS a thing, even if there was a default. 2e had entire manuals full of subraces. I get it that you don't like them, but don't pretend they're a shitty new invention.

They weren't uin the core boo, fatass

>>48970163
Anon High Elves and Wood Elves have been things for ages.
Remember Eladrin?
They were high elf stand ins.
Remember sun and moon elves?
Same fuckin thing.
There are already dozens upon dozens of races throughout the versions of DnD, especially in 3.5 and PF where there is all kinds of added shit purely so casters could crunch harder.

Furthermore sub races is just a general classification thing that gives broad strokes to a race while subrace gives more personality.
Sort of like White Guy versus Black Guy.
There's obvious differences in not only physical appearance, but even outside of stereotypes it's been proven that the two evolved differently.
Same with Wood elves, high elves, and dark elves (drow)

>>48970213
Just add feats and nix the added option to go with feats then you number punching fedora-jockey.
Like, honestly if you don't like something, homebrew it.
You're a big boy who can buy rule books and play games in the privacy of his own home, right?
Then play the game how you like. Not like the fun police are gonna break down your door because you rule zero'd something.

I have a question.
Can you keep Shillelagh up on two seperate Clubs if you're Two Weapon Fighting with them?

>>48970276

> A BLOO BLOO NO ONE CAN CRITICIZE MY SYSTEM UNLESS THEY LIKE IT

> GENERALS ARE ONLY FOR CIRCLEJERKING NOT DISCUSSION OF THE SYSTEM

>>48970341
>Basically it's a fine and functional game

So is fucking FATAL but that doesn't make it a good game.

>>48970431
Sure.

>>48970414
Holy shit you are retarded. The word eventually is in the post you quoted. Games don't start at level 12 you waste of skin

>>48970449
FATAL is not fine and barely functional.

>>48970414
>So there's no fucking point to racial bonuses at all then.

It's called flavor, son. Also the dwarf has to dedicate harder, like I said.

Like...

>Drow
>16 Cha at level 1
>ASI at level 4, CHA 18
>ASI at level 8, CHA 20
>ASIs at 12, 16, and 19 can be any feat

>Dwarf
>15 CHA at level 1
>ASI at level 4, CHA 17
>ASI at level 8, CHA 19
>ASI levels 12, 16, and 19 can be a feat, but one of those feats should be to CHA, or else the dwarf should dedicate its level 12 ASI to Charisma and something else

The two still end up with very different feels as a result of the different choices they have to make as they level.

>>48970341
>Highest point buy stat you can get at level 1 is 17, it takes at least until level 8 to reach 20

You're not including racial modifiers in that you fucking retard nigger. You're also assuming most people don't roll for stats, which most of them still do.

> inb4 the "i don't therefore most don't" fallacy makes its predictable appearance.

Also

> Personal taste, ban them if it bothers you so much

I did ban them you stupid cunt, and people got pissy because "lol they're in the core book why are you banning them" and I had to deal with that shit for the rest of the campaign. Shitty player? Yeah. But this shit is attractign them like flies.

> Class levels can and should be reserved for player characters.

Because the PCs are the most powerful thing in the setting in every campaign.

Because fighting NPCs with mechanical variation is boring.

> . If the players aren't going to fight an NPC there's no reason to make a stat block.

Yeah because skill checks and allied NPCs are never a thing. Fuck off, retard.

> Perhaps ranger was just never meant to be

No, it was good in 4e. Mearls just sucks at designing. Keep shilling for him, though, I bet he might let you watch him fuck your wife one day if you say enough nice things about him on the internet.

>>48970449
FATAL is obviously not an actual functional game. The sheer number of tables, graphs, equations (yes, equations) and ridiculous dice rolls (1d10000 comes to mind) mean that no one would ever really be able to sit down and play it.

It exists as a misanthrope's art piece, not a coherent roleplaying system.

>>48970393

Pretty good. I fucking hate the full spellcasting but whatever. I also hate animal companions for rangers for the most part.

File: image.jpg (167KB, 576x800px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 576x800px

>>48970492
Yes he is you equally retarded nigger.
Point Buy in 5e ONLY allows up to 15 BEFORE racial bonuses.

>>48970457
>Games don't start at level 12 you waste of skin

Most of them never reach level 12, either, so their "equality" is fucking pointless because 5% of the players will ever experience it.

>>48970486
>Also the dwarf has to dedicate harder, like I said.

Yep, just like previous editions. At best you are arguing for the ability score cap, which is only made necessary by the runaway ASIs that get handed out like candy with twice the potency of 3.5 ASIs, as well as lack of racial penalties because "wah wah i want all race-class builts to be equally viable"

>>48970422
>It's a dissociated mechanic

Short rests? In what way? You can't wrap your mind around the concept of a *lunch break*? What the Hell kind of third world 14-hour-a-day hellhole do you live in, Anon?

>They weren't uin the core boo, fatass

If you're gonna take that tack then there shouldn't be any races but human, nor any classes but fighter, cleric, and wizard. Even rogue should be a splatbook add-on, you neophobe.

>>48970496
>The sheer number of tables, graphs, equations

D&D has a lot of tables. Also I don't think I witnessed even a single graph in the FATAL playbook, but I'll just let that go since you seem partial to throwing buzzwords out there haphazardly.

>>48970512
>full spellcasting

Buzzah wha? They only get up to 5th level, same as the core ranger.

Or do you mean built-in spellcasting, as opposed to it being a kit, like with the Eldritch Knight? Because that...

...that I can get behind. I've never understood why rangers in D&D were spellcasters when none of their inspirations (Robin Hood, Aragorn, the huntresses of Diana, etc.) were.

>>48970422
>Fatass
Sick insult, friend. Doesn't change the fact they have always been an important part of the lore and their continuing inclusion indicates their popularity. If anything, 5e did us a favor by not requiring splatbooks for them.

>>48970438
Generals are for discussing how to have fun with the system with other people who enjoy it. If you obviously can't have fun with the system, I see no reason why you'd want to be here.

>>48970556
Doesn't FATAL literally have tables for anus gaps?

>>48970525

So why would anyone ever use point buy then?

>>48970542

I'm talking about AD&D, not OD&D you dumb cunt. Stop strawmanning.

File: 1264969195892.jpg (31KB, 526x300px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 526x300px

I'm a stupid DM running a premade adventure (Phandelver into Elemental Evil) and love the idea of my players having backgrounds, but I have no idea how to incorporate them. Should I try making things like adversaries behind the scenes? Like one player is a mercenary who likes to murderhobo everything, and another is a monk trying to find "peace in all things" like Buddah. What I mean is their Ideals Bonds and Flaws, how do I incorporate what they do to these decisions? I don't think I should punish them for not doing what their sheets say, but at the same time I'm trying to bring them back to the table by making their characters feel interesting and a part of the story.

>>48968453
Warlocks basically live by gm fiat, given how their patrons are aware of the pact, with rare exceptions, and as such liable of revoking all of theose unspeakable magical powers if the warlock displeases them. As such, GMs tend to interact a lot with warlock players on a roleplay level and insert their patrons in the plot a lot: the trick is usually in having the patron ask for something minor, but beneficial to them in the long run. Once had a warlock player whose patron, i ruled, required her to pluck the eyes of her fallen enemies: as you can imagine, the patron's objective was clearly not to decorate the world with flowers, but the player took some time to notice that all that eyes plucking was not having good consequences.

>>48970612
>So why would anyone ever use point buy then?
Speed and functionality.
The dice don't favor everyone.

>>48970393
It's a fun variant but it doesn't really do anything to fix beast master.

>>48970621
Backgrounds are mostly there to give roleplaying incentives. So if your monk's ideal is "peace in all things" and he resolves a very tense situation by diffusing it (even if combat would be easier) then you give him inspiration.

Also, don't allow murderhobos.

>>48970612
>So why would anyone ever use point buy then?
Because they don't like randomly getting bad stats, obviously. Or GM doesn't allow it because afraid of fucking up party balance

File: image.jpg (91KB, 564x1087px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 564x1087px

>>48970538
If you aren't a fighter or rogue, you get FIVE ASIs.
4, 8, 12, 16, 19.
This allows for even a 10 to hit 20 if you dedicate all five of your ASIs into it if you rolled stats and got shit all.
But most cases you'll probably have higher than 10, so you'll probably be taking a feat in there somewhere.
Which means you have LESS ASIs.
Now, this adds together in that the feats in 5e do a lot more than they used to, such as armor training increasing stats, which means you give up half your ASI to get a feat. Woo.

>>48970612
Because dice mean you can end up with a mentally retarded cripple as the party wizard if you roll poorly

>>48970579

Yeah that's what I meant.I like eldritch knight, though. Rangers casting spells are pretty gay.

>>48970584

Generals are for discussion related to 5e. Criticism of 5e relates to 5e. If you can't handle it, go to RPGnet and hide in your safe space.

Yep, FATAL has tables for anus gaps. It also is a "functional" game, whatever the fuck that means, since you only define your tersm as convenient to your argument. However, using the dictionary definition of "functional", FATAL and 5e are the same. And, as "fun" is subjective, again, FATAL and 5e are the same.

Now, do I actually think that? No. FATAL is fucking terrible. But using "functional" and "fun" as descriptors of a game being good when both are entirely subjective (as well as "balanced" and similar things) means you are a fucking retard who cannot handle actual discussion.

And, subraces were not in the splatbooks, you fucking retard. I am talking about Wood Elf and High Elf. It would be fine if one was the actual default, but now every DM has to adjust their world building to include Wood elves, when many GMs have elves as a race, and that's what elves fucking are, they default to high elves.

My solution? Wood elves and high elves are the same fucking thing and it's just your choice which one you like more. You're playing an elf, you're playing an elf. I'm sick of having to decide where each of six different subraces live of a race that is exactly the fucking same.

I mean, tallflings and regular halflings? Forest gnomes and rock gnomes? Who gives a fucking god damn about that shit, just let them CHOOSE one of their racial modifiers instead of creating new subraces that don't matter.

>>48970612
>I'm talking about AD&D, not OD&D you dumb cunt. Stop strawmanning.

Nowhere did you suggest that; in fact these two posts are the first mention of AD&D in the entire thread thus far.

If anything your mentioning drow in the Monster Manual as an optional race suggests you were talking about 3.5 (since while they were in 3.0 MM, the stats for them as a race weren't there, they had to be extrapolated using the rules in the 3.0 DMG).

Which does not change the overall point, RE: your argument against drow being a core race seems to be rooted in neophobia and/or a desperate need to get your players to like you and fear of doing something they don't like.

If your hold on your players is that tenuous, then it says a lot about you.

>>48970612
>So why would anyone ever use point buy then?

It allows for a more balanced and customized character than the default method of rolling dice/taking the default array, which might not give you the starting stats you want for your character.

Although having said that, I prefer rolling dice.

>>48969145

Why? Having such a huge armor increase over 2 handed weapons makes it competitive, otherwise I'd just take the -2 AC for the huge increase in damage from GWM.

>>48970492
The highest allowable point buy score before racial modifiers is 15. Read the book.

I don't care about drow or your personal life at all so I'm not going to discuss them

Class levels should be reserved for PCs because they should be the most mechanically complex thing in the setting. Power doesn't come into it, there's just no need for NPCs to have such specifically-worded abilities when the DM can just let them do whatever function it is they need to do. An example list of NPC abilities and features and their effects on CR is also provided in the DMG, anything more fluffy than those can be safely whipped up without specifically-worded NPC classes.

Making skill checks against an NPC is a conflict with them, so obviously you'd need to stat at least their mental ability scores. Likewise an NPC companion in combat with monsters would need ability scores. Statting out both of those can be easily achieved using the DMG guidelines or borrowing a feature or two from a class. There's still no need for specific NPC-only classes there.

Ranger was good in 4e partly because of its enormous damage output and partly because of its ability to manipulate the grid-based combat system with lots of shifting and forced movement. Without the grid, and with martial DPS taken over by the Fighter, there's nowhere really for the Ranger to go. Wilderness survival is certainly an important aspect but it's hard to base a class around, especially with the carried-over ideas of favoured enemy/terrain meaning the Ranger has to specialise within its narrow domain in ways other classes don't. I'll freely admit that Ranger, Beastmaster most of all, is the weakest part of the game. It needs a hefty overhaul and reconsideration of the role it's meant to play. But the other classes manage absolutely fine, and in the mean time I'll just recommend my players to pick ranged Fighter with the outlander background if they need to scratch that wilderness itch.

Why you dithering idiots responding to an obvious troll?
God, for all of this board's inventive usage of hair images they still fall for that shit worse then any other board.

>>48970642
>The dice don't favor everyone.

Yeah that applies to in-game play, too. At least 4d6 has a bell curve unlike the d20 where you can roll a 20 and kill off your character before you even get to level 2.

It's all the same shit. Just because you have to live with the consequences longer (from a gamble which you chose) doesn't mean you get to bitch about it. Especially given that most rolled scores are actually pretty good, it's just that most players are whiny bitches who insist on rerolling if they don't get all 17s.

>>48970672
>Because dice mean you can end up with a mentally retarded cripple as the party wizard if you roll poorly

You're assuming 3d6 straight down, idiot. Stop thinking that everyone who rolls for stats rolls specifically for each score. That is fucking retarded. People normally roll, as per THE FUCKING RULES IN THE BOOK, six scores, then ASSIGN them to what they want.

So no, you don't get a mentally retarded cripple wizard. Clearly you are mentally crippled, however, as you insist on perpetuating a "rule" that literally does not exist in order to support an argument against something you don't like.

>>48970685
>subraces were not in the splatbooks, you fucking retard

The Complete Adventurer series from 2e begs to differ. If you're going to make sweeping generalizations, at least get informed first.

Oh wait, you're not here to be informed, you're here to discuss a game you don't enjoy with people who enjoy it.

>>48969346

>War makes you a better paladin than the paladin

Not even fucking close.

>>48970621
Try to incorporate scenarios that challenge or promote their ideals. Also try to occasionally reference their chosen backgrounds if you can fit it in without it seeming too gimmicky.

Soldier character chose the only-survivor background? Have them come across a sole survivor of the bbeg's slaughterfest. Maybe the npc doesn't handle it well and shuts down, or tries to rush into battle to join his fallen comrades. How does soldier PC react? How does another PC, maybe one who thinks highly of death in battle, react too?

Not the best example, but it's usually easy to challenge/involve a few characters at once. They won't always take the bait or see the connection, but it's up to you if you want to let it play out or maybe prompt them a little.

>>48970732
*bait images
Stupid new phone.

>>48970672
>This allows for even a 10 to hit 20 if you dedicate all five of your ASIs into it if you rolled stats and got shit all.

Yeah, stop creating convenient situations that rarely happen to support your argument about hwat usually happens.

> so you'll probably be taking a feat in there somewhere.

If I want to. Remember that feats are an OPTIONAL RULE. Just because most people use them doesn't mean they aren't still OPTIONAL.

> Which means you have LESS ASIs.

Excep you don't because half the feats GIVE you an ASI.

> Now, this adds together in that the feats in 5e do a lot more than they used to, such as armor training increasing stats, which means you give up half your ASI to get a feat. Woo.

I won't argue with that, but that doesn't mean racial penalties shouldn't exist (which was my original point), in fact, plentiful ASIs only provide MORE compelling reason for them to exist, because you can easily make up for them.

And again, it's a 5% difference either way for most of the stats.

>>48970734
>roll 3-7 for every single stat despite all odds (I've had this happen to me twice in rolled games)
>NUH UH THE RULES SAY SOMETHING DIFFERENT YOU RETARD
When people say the dice don't favor someone they mean not getting a single stat above 12.

>>48970734
>People normally roll, as per THE FUCKING RULES IN THE BOOK, six scores, then ASSIGN them to what they want.

Yes, but it is possible to roll something like 8, 9, 12, 10, 11, 5. Not terribly likely, but possible (actually the most statistically likely set of rolls off of 4d6 drop lowest is, in fact, the default array), and forces a character to be bad or even just awful at everything when compared to his fellow adventurers. Hence, point buy as an alternative, for those who don't like to run the risk.

File: 1766734634.png (106KB, 230x230px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 230x230px

I need advice on a character that I want to play in my group

He is a Human LN druid who worships Waukeen, the merchants friend. My group said it sounded like a hypocritical character and laughed but I want to play him like this

>raised in a merchants family
>came from a rich life
>was taught the ways of business
>felt he was missing something in life
>ventured into the woods, met an old hermit who knew exactly what his problem was
>acted as a Mr Miyagi style druid teacher to him
>upon finishing his training he received his druid focus (a yew wand)
>combined his two ways of life into one ideal
>believes harmony can come from nature and man
>believes forests can be harvested for resources and trade but only some much may be taken, nature must have enough resources leftover to sustain itself and even more so, it must flourish in happiness
>knows this ideal will be hard to uphold
>will fight dutifully to protect it
>also believes that businesses must be viewed equally, no one shop should be turned down for another

What do you guys think? Does that sound LN? One of my group guys said I should be Evil

>>48970739
>The Complete Adventurer series from 2e begs to differ.
Man, those were the days....

>>48970732
Only siege warfare works. We need to convert some 3.5 rules for starving a troll.

>>48970685
>It would be fine if one was the actual default, but now every DM has to adjust their world building to include Wood elves, when many GMs have elves as a race, and that's what elves fucking are, they default to high elves.
>My solution? Wood elves and high elves are the same fucking thing and it's just your choice which one you like more. You're playing an elf, you're playing an elf.
Now what if a gm wants to have different species of elves, then? He should separate the elves in two subraces. The only difference here is that you like one way and not the other, but who says you are the measure of all things? Furthermore, if a gm doesn't want wood elves , doesn't have to adjust his special snowflake of a setting to include them, he can just remove them completely. Do you need a manual to sit on a chair or what? Everything in the manual is subject to gm fiat.
Anyway, most of the dnd worlds have subraces of elves, so subraces are included. If subraces are not present in a world, it is up to gm to decide if disallowing any of them or use them to represent slightly different groups of leves in the same race. It is not hard. Deal with it.

>>48970804
That's LN I'd say.
Definitely an odd fire for a Druid though; other Druids would probably think he's crazy or deluded while foresters and other sorts who profit from the wilderness would basically want him to make up his mind.

>>48970621
The Phandelver box set literally gives every premade character a background that ties into the main quest which is how you do it.

For example the Rogue has links to the Redbrand rats in Phandalin which are an early adversary and the Wizard wants to restore a Temple of Oghma which appears in one of the dungeons.

>>48970808
Ignoring them works better.
And hiding them too.

>>48970804

Definitely don't think that's evil, that's solidly neutral. Though other anon is right, everyone else in the world is likely to think your druid is off their rocker for basically being a benevolent forest capitalist selling out the woodlands for coin. While on the flipside, the business folk will be mad at you getting in the way of their profits. It doesn't make your character a hypocrite just... wildly eccentric when measured against most druids.

>>48970775
>plentiful ASIs only provide MORE compelling reason for them to exist, because you can easily make up for them.

ASIs aren't plentiful. Only fighters and rogues get more than 5, and the game assumes that you'll be spending at least 2 of them into increasing your main stat, meaning that most classes only really have 3 to play around with as feats or actual ASIs (if your DM doesn't allow feats or just none of them interest you).

At present there's already an "ASI tax" for a dwarf bard to become as good as a drow bard, since his 3rd ASI is essentially spoken for as being either an ASI into Charisma and something else, or else a feat that increases Charisma. There is no need to add to the ASI tax even further by giving dwarves -1 Charisma and forcing them to spend their full ASI on Charisma; or -2 and forcing them to spend FOUR of there merely 5 ASIs on Charisma.

>And again, it's a 5% difference either way for most of the stats.

When there is no other dependable way to make up for things, 5% is a *lot*. At the very least it always means that you'll be objectively worse then a race more mechanically friendly to the class you've chosen.

Why do you want to punish someone for playing a dwarf bard?

>>48970804
>wants equality, and for life to "flourish in happiness"
> evil
Your friend doesn't understand what evil is. Interesting character tho. He would probably end up to LN or even more good-aligned, depending on how you roleplay him.

>>48970694
>in fact these two posts are the first mention of AD&D in the entire thread thus far.

You're a fucking retarded nigger.

>>48970422
> 2e had entire manuals full of subraces

> If anything your mentioning drow in the Monster Manual as an optional race suggests you were talking about 3.5 (since while they were in 3.0 MM, the stats for them as a race weren't there, they had to be extrapolated using the rules in the 3.0 DMG).

You could always figure out racial mods by subtracting 10 / 11 from the base anyway, but that's not even relevant.

And yes, I am talking about 3.5, but I had people tyring to play drow in AD&D, too. Drizzt was written during the time of AD&D and I bet anything he's the reason stats were included in the 3.0 manual for playing drow.

> neophobia
> getting players to like me

Hell, I might agree with the first one. But so would shitloads of the grognards who Merals was trying to pander to with 5e. He even admits he wants to reunite the fanbase with this shit. Most grogs are EDO fags (elf dwarf orc) who would scoff at drow as a playable race. They don't need to be in the fucking core book.

Why?

Because they do not belong in a fantasy society.

Hell, half of what made legend of drizzt at all compelling, if it even was, was the shoot-on-sight attitude surface people had for drow. I understand now that the SJWs have pussified drow to be accepted in all cultures, same as orcs. Hell, even gnomes and kobolds hating each other has probably been removed.

If accepted on the surface, then drow lose 90% of the point of their race existing (though the subraces in 5e are pointless anyway, fluff-wise). Their function is destroyed. If drow are not accepted on the surface then why the FUCK would they be allowed in an adventuring party? Not everyone is as accepting as Bruenor and CattiBrie and all the other faggots in those books. There is no reason besides handwaving that a party of humans wouldn't shoot a drow on sight.

>>48970723
I'd argue that it doesn't make it "competitive," it makes it much better. The damage from GWF doesn't compensate for a +5 to AC.

If we take the absolute best-case scenario for both - 20th-level character with 20 strength - we get the following numbers:

2-handed (assuming you're using GWF, because that's what you're implying makes 2-handed work): +9 to hit (+3 weapon, +5 str, +6 prof, -5 GWF), 25 damage (2d6 + 3 (or 10) (biggest weapon), +5 str, +10 GWF), 22 AC (+3 full plate, +1 fighting style).

1-handed: +14 to hit (+3 weapon, +5 str, +6 prof), 12.5 (1d8 + 3 (or 7.5) (biggest 1-handed weapon), +5 str), 27 AC (+3 full plate, +3 shield, +1 fighting style).

Aaaaand I just talked myself out of it. Against enemies with good AC and attack bonuses, the two-hander would get demolished because a difference of +/-5 is absolutely huge for accuracy. But against anything with only decent numbers, the GWF damage output would indeed be ridiculous.

Man, I love doing D&D math.

>>48970739

Again, I am talking about 3.5 in this case. The subraces were listed as an optional rule.... IN THE CORE BOOKS.

And yes, 3.5 splats also had subraces in splatbooks, just like 2e. It was far easier to disallow those because of the lack of entitlement complex surrounding core options.

You ever try banning core in D&D? The autists always whine like shit. And rightly so, because a DM shouldn't ban everything in the fucking core books.

RAW, a player has a right to play drow in 5e. That is an issue. But please, continue to blame my DMing (which I complimented on consistenly by the majority of my group) to ignore the fact that 5e has a core race option that is literally incompatible with fantasy society and severely handicaps the party by saddling them with the equivalent of a wanted ISIS member.

>>48970694
>in fact these two posts are the first mention of AD&D in the entire thread thus far.

I'm going to assume you actually don't know instead of making fun of you.

5e IS AD&D. 3rd edition was a continuation of the AD&D product line, but since the game called D&D went out of business in the 80's, they decided to drop the "advanced" in order to appeal to new players. You've been playing AD&D all along.

>>48970947
A drow is no worse than a half-orc. Your average peasant is more likely to have suffered an orc attack than a drow one.

>>48970781

I don't feel like doing the math but 8 years of roleplaying is enough to deduce that that very, very rarely happens.

Oh, and in that case? REROLL. Even 3.5 said that if you didn't get anything above 13, you were entitled to a reroll.

>>48970789

Yeah the chances of that happening are astromincally low, not just "not terribly likely" you fucking minimizing cunt.

> (actually the most statistically likely set of rolls off of 4d6 drop lowest is, in fact, the default array),

Yeah no fucking shit, that's the same reason why 2d8 averages to 9 in the hp calculations. The game assumes averages, no shit.

> and forces a character to be bad or even just awful at everything when compared to his fellow adventurers.

Except you reroll if you roll scores that low. It's not my fault if 5e didn't include a baseline rule that even fucking 3.5 had.

> Hence, point buy as an alternative, for those who don't like to run the risk

You mean, for pussy faggot bitches who can't stand their character not being exactly what THEY want.

I bet you insist the GM let you decide what the monsters roll to hit, since it's YOUR character YOU get to decide everything about him.

And before you go "wah wah those are in game events", chargen is part of the game you fucking faggot.

>>48970947
The PHB states that there's issues and it's a DM's call and there's plenty of surface drow already.

So yeah you're kind of a shit DM.

>>48970947
>a player has a right to play drow
A player has a right to do jack shit. If your players are complimenting you because you cave to their every desire for special snowflake characters, that reflects badly on you as a DM as far as I'm concerned. A good DM can say no sometimes, even if players get butthurt, because he knows it will result in a more coherent experience for everyone down the line.

Also, I'm not the person who was blaming your DMing. I know it's hard to tell on an anonymous message board, but you're arguing with at least 3 people right now.

>>48970734
>doesn't mean you get to bitch about it.
I wasn't. I was just stating my inherent bad luck when it comes to rolling for stats.
You wanted reasons why people would want to go with Point Buy and I gave them to you.

>>48970804
>man and nature can thrive in harmony by harvesting its bounties responsibly
Sounds like fine Druid shtick to me. No reason that couldn't be neutral good.
Alignments are stupid anyway and not RAW in 5e but whatever.

Make sure to pick up Plant Growth (3rd level spell) and cast it on as much farmland as you can.

>>48970814
>Now what if a gm wants to have different species of elves, then? He should separate the elves in two subraces. The only difference here is that you like one way and not the other, but who says you are the measure of all things?

When you see "elf thread" on /tg/ do they fucking specify high elves or wood elves? No, they do not. Those GMs are in the minority and you know it. And that is fine, by the way. I have no issue with subraces. I like them. I have an issue with splitting a race into two equally common subraces so that "elf" no longer has meaning.

> Furthermore, if a gm doesn't want wood elves , doesn't have to adjust his special snowflake of a setting to include them, he can just remove them completely. Do you need a manual to sit on a chair or what? Everything in the manual is subject to gm fiat.

Yes, and now the GM has to go out of his way to say "high elves only" rather than before when he could just say "elf"

The game used to be biased toward simplicity with additional options as an afterthought. Even 3.5 was structured this way. You wanted to play an elf? Here's an elf. Later on, here are some other elves you can play if you wish, but "elf" still means high elf as a default.

The classes are structured similarly.

> Anyway, most of the dnd worlds have subraces of elves, so subraces are included. If subraces are not present in a world, it is up to gm to decide if disallowing any of them or use them to represent slightly different groups of leves in the same race. It is not hard. Deal with it.

So basically, your counterargument is "lol that's how the book is, deal with it faggot lol"

No shit it's not hard to understand, it just adds an extra layer of needless complexity in race selection.

Fucking idiots.

>>48970877

> ASIs aren't plentiful
> +10 for the weakest class

Even 3.5 didn't have that much with fucking Magic items.

> At present there's already an "ASI tax" for a dwarf bard to become as good as a drow bard,

Yep, I get that. Except it would be the same thing if the game had racial penalties instead of all bonuses.

> When there is no other dependable way to make up for things, 5% is a *lot*.

Not really when, statistically speaking, that difference is only going to actually matter 5% of the time. You underestimate how swingy a dice roll is. 95% of the time it will not matter for shit whether you are playing an orc bard or an elf bard.

> Why do you want to punish someone for playing a dwarf bard?

5e still punishes them with an ASI tax. In fact probably more so than 3.5 did, or even 4e.So by supporting 5e the question is actually for you: why do YOU hate dwarf bards?

File: Untitled.png (497KB, 715x338px) Image search: [Google]

497KB, 715x338px

>>48970908
>If accepted on the surface

Bro. It's called reading. You should try it, it's fun.

>Check with your Dungeon Master to see if you can play a drow character.
>especially when they are so often on the receiving end of hatred.

Drow are *not* accepted on the surface by default. It outright states as much.

>There is no reason besides handwaving that a party of humans wouldn't shoot a drow on sight.

I hate to break this to you, but as a DM you control the NPCs, not the PCs: that is an *ironclad* rule of D&D. If the players decide that their characters are not the sort to shoot drow on sight - perhaps because they want to let their fellow player have fun - then there is nothing reasonable you can do about it.

Now, if you want to have all the NPCs react with hate and fear - fine! That's your perogative. I encourage it, even. That's how NPCs reacted to *my* drow character until very recently, and that only because of 12 levels worth of gaining a reputation as a hero throughout the region. Even then she's the least-trusted member of the adventuring party.

>>48970990
>tfw there's still people who think Gary was that kind of DM

>5e thread: Shadow of Virt edition

>>48970969

If anything that makes drow even more feared, idiot. They fend off orcs all the time, drow are FAR more powerful.

I agree that orcs should not be a default easy player race either, but at least a half-orc is only half a freak.

So actually, a drow is far, far worse. Also, an elf and a drow would NOT coexist in the same party unless you assume all drow are Drizzt clones (which further dilutes their identity).

>>48970963

Anon, most people refer to 1e and 2e as AD&D. Yes, I have heard people refer to 3.0 as "AD&D 3rd edition" but most people don't use that so I decided not to confuse things further by being all proper and precise, alright?

File: 1432271738879.jpg (36KB, 640x432px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 640x432px

Stop talking to him! He's a needlessly abrasive attention whore that clearly either doesn't care at all about D&D, or cares so autistically much that nothing you say will convince him. He name dropped ISIS of all things for fuck's sake. Don't worry, no one is going to accidentally take his hot opinions seriously.

>>48971032

And yet you contribute nothing to the discussion yourself. Fuck off.

>>48971040

> drow do not exist in all worlds
> therefore ask if you can play one

It's not that they don't exist, it's that people literally will shoot one on sight because half the population believes they are fucking demons.

We're not even getting into Tielfings from 4e, literal demon spawn, being a core race. Drow are bad enough.

> I hate to break this to you, but as a DM you control the NPCs, not the PCs: that is an *ironclad* rule of D&D. If the players decide that their characters are not the sort to shoot drow on sight - perhaps because they want to let their fellow player have fun - then there is nothing reasonable you can do about it.

Yes I can, because that is called metagaming. It's equivalent to them not shooting a doppelganger because they "know" it's not their friend or some shit.

>>48971062
When talking about "older editions" (which we have been), AD&D 1 and 2 are included. Saying they aren't because they have an A in the name is disingenuous.

>>48971041
>Implying Gygax had any good ideas I give a shit about
Arneson invented the TTRPG and as soon as Gygax stopped controlling AD&D all of his rules (all of them) were removed.

All of them.

>>48971065
There's actually only one idiot replying the him and his excuse was something about "siege warfare". Presumably he was aware he was being easily baited and just didn't have a good reason for his apparent lack of self-control.

>>48971062
>that makes drow even more feared, idiot
That makes them an unknown in most of the realms.

>an elf and a drow would NOT coexist
BG and NWN would imply otherwise.

When levelling up, do you prefer to roll for HP or take the average?

>>48971099
Siege warfare is about starving out a troll. How do you starve out a troll?

Ignore his dumb ass.

>>48971091
>Yes I can, because that is called metagaming. It's equivalent to them not shooting a doppelganger because they "know" it's not their friend or some shit.

Yea man, everyone should roll up characters in isolated rooms and only find out what the party will be when they all assemble for the first time. Can't have dirty players who want to have dirty fun coordinating to make a diverse and balanced party.

>>48970971
>Except you reroll if you roll scores that low

Sure, but where's the cutoff?

Assume something a bit more likely - 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14. That's objectively worse than the default array but, under even 3.5's reroll rules, not something you would be allowed to reroll.

>I bet you insist the GM let you decide what the monsters roll to hit

Dude, I said upthread that I personally prefer rolling for stats. I'm just capable of understanding why other people might prefer the alternative. Cool your tits.

>>48971036
>Even 3.5 didn't have that much with fucking Magic items.

Nope. Remember that 3.5 D&D assumed a "magic market", PCs could buy any magic item they desired as long as they were in a big enough city. By default it was assumed that by the time you hit 20th level you'd have at least one +6 ability-boosting item; one need look no further than the pregenerated NPC tables contained within the DMG for that. For example, the 20th-level Paladin was assumed to have a +6 Cloak of Charisma, in addition to a +5 melee weapon. And NPCs were generated gear valuing only about 1/3rd of what a PC would have at the same level.

So actually, taking the assumed magic items into account, PCs in 3.5 actually come out ahead - +5 from ASIs, +6 from magic item, for a total of +11 rather than +10. Plus they could easily afford another +6 magic item, or various Tomes for increasing their key stat, or paying a wizard to cast Wish on them up to five times to do the same, or any number of other options.

>>48971065
>He name dropped ISIS of all things for fuck's sake.

Yep, because I was making an analogy to how drow are treated.

>>48971170
>So actually, taking the assumed magic items into account, PCs in 3.5 actually come out ahead - +5 from ASIs, +6 from magic item, for a total of +11 rather than +10. Plus they could easily afford another +6 magic item, or various Tomes for increasing their key stat, or paying a wizard to cast Wish on them up to five times to do the same, or any number of other options.

Not to mention that stats were unbound so even if the ASIs were exactly the same, 3.5 chars could take their stats much further.

File: 1459738306572.jpg (391KB, 1374x1425px) Image search: [Google]

391KB, 1374x1425px

>>48971103

Given the point buy shills in this thread, I am guessing the latter. I have a feeling the PBIDF is too pussy to roll dice for combat, either, they just compare their character's stats to the monster and assume they win, Munchkin-style.

>>48971160

Sure, except your example doesn't directly contradict the assumed lore of the world like accepting a drow into the party for no fucking reason does.

Now, if he gave them a reason to trust him, that'd be one thing. But they would still have the party dynamic of a group of KKK warriors and one black dude.

>>48971091
>Yes I can, because that is called metagaming

There are a million in-game reasons to make things work.

1. At least one player already knew the drow character from childhood (as a mentor, childhood friend, etc).
2. The players are simply not the sort to kill *anyone* on sight
3. The drow is disguises himself (via makeup, hoods and scarves, magic, whatever) for a long time, not letting the players know about his true nature until he's built up a high level of trust
4. The drow is an established agent for the king/local lord/grand poo-bah, and has been assigned to the party to aid them. Works better in campaigns that start at high level.
5. The drow bribes them/begs them not to kill him, and they take mercy.

Seriously, did none of these occur to you?

>>48968982

Michael Jackson was a fucking pedophile. Supporting his music is supporting the victimization of children,

>>48971302
My point was that it doesn't make his music worse. Whether or not you pay for it is another matter.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (28KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 1280x720px

Virt is having a busy day I see.

It's time for the 9th level Wizard to start working on a more permanent base of operations. What spells other than Wall of Stone, should he have for this?

>>48970925
> take the absolute best-case scenario for both
> no 24 Str Barbarian
> no belt of giant strength
> no advantage
> Defender gets two +3 items

Anon would you consider factoring any of those in? I'm interested in the results but bad at math.

>>48971302
>Michael Jackson was a fucking pedophile

The court of law says different. Not guilty on all fourteen charges, on the basis of the fact that none of the accusers or witnesses could get their facts to actually match each others', not to mention all of their integrity was in question - the former bodyguard who robbed a radio shack, the main who stole a sketch of Elvis and sold it for $30,000, the one who hosted a porn web site called Virtual Sin, etc., etc. The whole thing was a blatant grab at Jackson's money, nothing more.

>>48971262

Except players are already the special snowflakes of the world. Even in the most racist era of the US there were friendly white folks, it just happens that this particular adventuring group doesn't hate drow (or more accurately, are willing to give them a chance on the adventuring team to earn their trust). Players can absolutely decide not to be racists in a world full of racists because that's just part of being a special snowflake adventuring team. Half the point of being adventurers is that you aren't marching in lockstep with all the perspectives and opinions of the NPCs around you. And half the point of playing is that you get to decide the temperment, outlooks, and history of your character.

>>48971369

Demiplane.

>>48969724

The 5E "design" team took popular stuff from previous editions and threw it at the fan game testers in the open test who fixed everything for Mearl's team and they put their name on it and turned it in..

>>48971265
>1. At least one player already knew the drow character from childhood (as a mentor, childhood friend, etc).

Why would this even happen? Again, drow are not welcome on the surface.

> 2. The players are simply not the sort to kill *anyone* on sight

If literal villagers would do it, the characters must be huge pussies, or literally evil by negligence to let an evil creature go free when they could have stopped it.

> 3. The drow is disguises himself (via makeup, hoods and scarves, magic, whatever) for a long time, not letting the players know about his true nature until he's built up a high level of trust

Actually a good idea but most drow players are too emo and special to do this. Also props because that's what Drizzt did for a while, even late in the series.

> 4. The drow is an established agent for the king/local lord/grand poo-bah, and has been assigned to the party to aid them. Works better in campaigns that start at high level.

Would probably fuck with the party's trust of that person, but okay.

> 5. The drow bribes them/begs them not to kill him, and they take mercy.

Could work. But why would they let him join the party?

> Seriously, did none of these occur to you?

They did. And you can certainly make a drow character work. But when the GM is trying to reconcile how a group of characters knows each other (because trust me, it's rare that the players actually bother to do this shit unless you pull their fucking teeth, it's ridiculous. D&D needs a session zero like Dungeon World has) it becomes far more work with a fucking drow in the party. Not to mention half of those ideas are contingent on PC actions and the other half involve severely altering the campaign... for the sake of one player.

When the players show up with a dwarf cleric, human wizard, elf fighter, and ..... drow warlock.... yeah. Three are pretty easy to figure out, but the last one throws an unncessary wrench in the plans.

>>48971411
9th level Wizard, not 15th.

>>48971374
I could, but I stand by my best case scenario. A fighter gets 4 attacks per turn, so there's really no point comparing the barbarian in my opinion in terms of damage output.

I give the defender two +3 items because that was the premise - full magic gear, who would be stronger.

As for advantage, that gets complicated, because I'd also have to include the AC of the attacked monster, which means I'd have to get a lot more specific.

If you have a very specific situation in mind, I wouldn't mind running it. Until then, I'll stick with "two-handed better against low attack/defense values, one-handed better against high values."

>>48971508
>D&D needs a session zero like Dungeon World has

And here we are.

>>48971411
>Except players are already the special snowflakes of the world

Yes, eventually they are. But at 1st level they are mostly nobodies with a spark of talent that, hopefully, will let them become special.

Except being talented doesn't mean they are somehow progressive SJWs that will get raped by muslim cock and become more accepting as a result. Drow are actually evil and fuck up the surface world in most settings. Same with orcs, honestly. Why the FUCK would a group let one of those evil pricks into their party?

The difference between the KKK analogy and drow is that drow actually deserve the racism against them, and thus my ISIS comparison that you faggots flipped out about (not specifically you, some other cunt further up the thread). If you can't think of a reason to let an ISIS member into your party, then you can't think of a reason to let a drow into your party.

>>48971450

Yup. Basically what happened The game was designed with zero goal in mind besides to be as bland and nonoffensive and simple as possible. At which it succeeded. And it's still a pretty good game, it's just absolutely riddled with flaws and autistic design. Better than 3.5 and 4e? Maybe. Would it be better if it was competently designed, using the same base and most of the good ideas of the system? Absolutely.

File: DigiAnalyser-BakemonAnimation.gif (566KB, 250x188px) Image search: [Google]

566KB, 250x188px

Can a tiefling use disguise self and alter self to appear as a human?

How do monk unarmed attacks work in this edition?

As a level 1 monk do I roll 1d4+str each attack? Or does it count as two weapon fighting so its 2(1d4+str) or 2d4+str?

>>48971629
Yes, but keep in mind that if you don't watch out, your disguised horns and tail could knock into shit and be really weird.

File: 1459127293523.gif (1MB, 540x405px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 540x405px

>magical items that deal damage when someone it doesn't like tries to hold it
>magical items with minor passive effects
>such magical items have the potential to deal potentially massive amounts of damage to a target, but instead when equipped just give you +1 to hit

Good job whatever wizard made this.

>>48971637
Check the Martial Arts feature on monks.

They can use dex, they start as 1d4, and you can make an unarmed strike as a bonus action. Do you start with 1d4 + Dex twice. The die size goes up as you level up, you get Extra Attack, and you can spend a ki point when you get them to use Flurry of Blows for two bonus action attacks instead of one.

>>48971660
So that caps out at 4 attacks a round with extra attack + flurry? If you multiclass fighter and pick up action surge its just 6 attacks then?

>>48971508
>Why would this even happen? Again, drow are not welcome on the surface.

SEE R.A. Salvatore's Sojourn as one possibility. I'm sure a bright young lad like you could think up more if you wanted to.

>the characters must be huge pussies, or literally evil

Being compassionate or merciful is not being a "pussy", nor is it evil.

>it becomes far more work with a fucking drow in the party

It really and truly doesn't. Not if you're worth even half your salt, let alone all of it.

>because trust me, it's rare that the players actually bother to do this shit unless you pull their fucking teeth

"Hey, Mike, Bob wants to play a drow character."
"Sweet."
"Can your character have known his for awhile? Just work out between you how you two met."
"Half-drunk and running from the law for a crime we probably didn't commit."
"That works."

Ta-da~!

>>48971637

LOL monk is 1d4 damage in this edition? Mearls confirmed for hating monks, even in 3.5 they were better.

>>48971637
1d4+strength mod OR dex mod. The 1d4 increases at later levels.
You can, as a bonus action, make one unarmed strike if you use the attack action to make an attack with either an unarmed strike or a monk weapon.

Unarmed strikes are superior to two-weapon-fighting as they add str/dex mod on top of their bonus action attack.

1 ki to use two unarmed strikes instead of one as a bonus action.

This means that you cannot take extra unarmed strikes if you use step of the wind or patient defence or one of the other bonus actions.

An optimal level 1 monk will do:
1d8+DEXMOD (quarterstaff) damage, plus flurry of blows for
1d4+DEXMOD (unarmed strike)
and
1d4+DEXMOD (unarmed strike)

Also please consider unarmed strikes can be used regardless of if your hands are full, and that they do not count as 'melee weapon attacks', and they do not ever use weapons.

>>48971674
Yep, sounds about right.

>>48971508
>drow are not welcome on the surface

Some people have no idea drow even exist.

>>48971692
>>48971694
I'll just stick with fighter, that seems like some weak ass shit desu.

>>48971675
>Being compassionate or merciful is not being a "pussy", nor is it evil.

If you let a pedophile free to commit more pedophilia, you are partially responsible. Assuming you subscribe to a theory of moral responsibility, which most good aligned heroes probably would.

> "Half-drunk and running from the law for a crime we probably didn't commit."

Except the drow wouldn't even have been on the surface long enough to know Bob because unless he had a warband he probably would have been hunted down and killed. Especially at 1st level, you can't exactly fight the whole town militia at that level.

> It really and truly doesn't. Not if you're worth even half your salt, let alone all of it.

I am, anon. What you are saying is that good GMing means throwing established lore out the window in order to accomodate some idiot who wants to play a drow.

I am perfectly capable of doing that. I just think it's a fucking stupid idea.

I used to play Pathfinder. If I can figure out why a half-vampire, a thri-keen, a half-orc, a half-ogre, and three elves know each other, I think I can handle incorporating a drow.

However when you do this you are compromising the established lore of drow.

I understand D&D is basically Star Wars now where it is rare to find two people of the same race in a party and humans are a minority, but that is not how it was in OSR settings (mostly) and i guarantee my response to drow (being hunted down and attacked by city guard) is not much different than most old-school GMs.

Which 5e is trying to pander to.

And in Faerun drow are STILL not well-loved or respected and would face constant racism and abuse.

The PHB mentions none of that, setting up the player for disappointment when the DM unleashes a fucking hell storm of hate on him. Which could make for good roleplaying is probably going to blindside a new player who might pick drow cause he read the Drizzt novels.

>>48971730
You don't play monk to play the best damage.

Monks have mobility out the ass and stunning strike is the most repeatable control ability I can think of in 5e.

>>48969749
Honestly, I was more curious about what making someone go prone was useful for, since they just get right back up and are still next to you. Halving their speed doesn't seem useful if you use your shield to knock them down

>>48971571
>Drow are actually evil and fuck up the surface world in most settings.

Actually they don't. Drow raids are quite rare and mostly restricted to actions against elves. Large-scale drow actions almost never happen because of their inability to work together for five minutes. And they're just not that common, anyway.

The setting where they're most active on the surface (Forgotten Realms) is also the setting that provides the most possibilities for drow having semi-peaceful or even outright peaceful contact with surfacers (The Auzkovyn Clan, Eilistraee worshippers, Dambrathi nobility, the PCs are from regions where drow just don't show up like Thay or Rashamen, etc.)

>>48971674
Of course, you'd be gimping your unarmed damage, making it probably not worth it.

>>48971691
They get more attacks than most classes (any class at level 1-4) and their damage goes up to 1d12. Please read the book before posting stupid things.

>>48971571

It's not really that hard to find ways to integrate a drow player even in such settings if you're willing to try working with the players and be flexible. Example ways to do it:

>Good players don't usually kill unresisting characters, so they're willing to hear out this drow they met. Said drow offers their assistance in dealing with [dangerous thing]. Party reluctantly accepts. All goes well, trust builds, cue scene, party now has a reason to trust this particular drow and adventures and RP can be had.

>Party turns to [shady character] for help who tells them of a drow in the city who has the info they need. Said drow has been using the illegal networks to stay under the radar of law enforcement. Party meets, drow helps, trust is build, RP aplenty, cue scene.

>Drow has minor version of disguise self that lets them appear as a not-drow elf. Adventures with party, earns trust, reveals self (or not if it's that big of an issue), much RP to be had, cue scene.

>Noblebright priest tells party that they have been hiding a drow who has fled the underdark and wishes to turn to good. Priest requests party's help in saving drow's soul. Party reluctantly accepts, trust is built, RP is had, cue scene.

>Drow is serving out sentence as adventuring fodder, must adventure with party. Trust built, party argues on drow's behalf for release, blah blah.

Seriously there's a billion ways to figure out a plausible way to integrate a drow into the party as long as you're willing to give it a shot and work with the players.

>>48971771
If you grapple a creature, she has 0 speed.
If you knock her prone, she therefore cannot stand back up.

>>48971730
>implying

If you start with a dex of 18 (play variant human or elf or something with +2 dex while rolling at least a 16) you have +4 to hit and +4 to AC and +4 to initiative and +4 to dex saves and +4 to dex skills and +4 to damage

You deal
1d8+4 damage
1d4+4 damage
1d4+4 damage
For a total of
21.5 damage average if everything hits.
At level 2, and you can use flurry of blows twice a short rest.

A fighter using action surge with a greatsword would get:

2d6+4 and
2d6+4
22 damage, but only once a short rest.

Monks are stat intensive, but the fact they hit so many times makes them brilliant for things like the 'enlarge' spell or if they have access to hex.

>>48968163
>Tell us about times you have styled over your opponents
In our elemental evil game, my arcane trickster used disguise self to appear to be a water cultist and had the rest of the party tied up with rope, though they were knots that were super easy to break. He charmed the door guard at the water cultist compound and waltzed right on in with the party totally unquestioned. We went straight to the boss and curb-stomped him causing a good portion of the rest of the cultists to flee. It was also difficult because we basically aggro'd the entire compound at once but it was an amazing battle.

>>48971792
the damage goes up to 1d10.

Thats pretty shitty compared to 1d20 and having like 8 attacks like they did in earlier editions.

>>48971771

Knocking someone prone gives you advantage on melee attacks against them so it's an excellent way to increase your party's damage output.

So my group has been playing a game for 2 years and it has quite little combat, mostly roleplaying and stuff. I've started by own campaign for them during the summer and done 3 sessions so far, but I'm not sure if they should be progressing faster. We usually play ~5 hours and there's usually only 2-3 combats per session, despite this campaign being more combat-focused.

>First session
Mostly introductions and RP, some travelling in safe areas, and then a cyclops (deadly) random encounter plus 15 weasels on a (medium) encounter on the way back, which got BTFO'd by the Light cleric CD.
>Second
Travelling a bit more in the wilderness, a griffon (medium) while traveling and then 2 sabre-tooth tigers (hard) and 3 gnolls (medium) as nightly encounters (have since decided to halve encounter rate when not moving).
>Third
Shorter session, like 2.5 or 3 hours, basically only combat with a minotaur (medium) and 5 hunters that got surprise on them (medium).

Maybe combat isn't challenging enough? They're 5 players at 3rd level, the cyclops knocked out the barbarian twice but otherwise they've all stayed up, using popcorn initiative so usually they get 2 rounds while the monsters get 1 before the combat ends, so most encounters each monster will have 1-2 turns. I just feel like I'm lacking something, I'm doing mostly random encounters based on where they're traveling but at the same time they do tie into the world, give some cool treasure, and there are planned battles as well with more RP, so I don't think that should be a big problem.

>>48971763
Why do new players make a beeline for the characters that are hardest to roleplay? Of the five new players I know, four of them (completely independently) chose to play tieflings.

>>48971805
It requires half your movement speed to stand up from prone.

Half of zero is zero.

>>48971807
Oh, I neglected to mention, fighting styles and GWF and such would skew things in the fighter's favour.

But as said by other anon, monks aren't pure damage output classes.

They do have very competitive damage output, however.

>>48971398
Everybody was paid off or blackmailed. Jackson was guilty as hell kid diddler.

Everything I want to play feels like it would be shit. I haven't read a single class that sounded strong.

>>48971780

You are assuming Faerun. Most D&D players do not play Faerun. A lot do, but not most.

>>48971854
Zero movement to stand up = standing is a free action.

Standing =/= a free action.

You must spend SOMETHING to stand up. If you have no movement speed, you cannot do any move-related activity.

>>48971754
What animals could a commoner butcher kill in one blow?

>>48971830
Have you been mixing up the terrain? Maybe consider having some humanoid/smarter enemies flee, forcing a pursuit for a more dynamic encounter. Shit, maybe they even lead the players into a trap?

>>48971854
>>48971889
I know what I said doesn't actually work off of RAW, so I'm looking it up.

I believe it might be that you have to spend half of your base movement speed, which means if your movement speed is reduced to 0 you still need 15ft to stand up if you had 30ft movement before.

If you normally have 0 ft movement, that might work.

>>48971880
If they're all "weak," doesn't that mean they're balanced? Are you looking for a class that's better than the rest?

>>48971880

What do you want to play? There's plenty of strong classes (rogue, fighter, barbarian, cleric, wizard...) very few options are 'weak' right now.

File: boyadontdoit.jpg (18KB, 366x380px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 366x380px

>>48971854
You can drop prone without using any of your speed. Standing up takes m ore effort; doing so costs an amount of movement equal to half your speed. For example, if your speed is 30 feet, you must spend 15 feet of movement to stand up. You can’t stand up if you don’t have enough movement left or if your speed is 0.
>Player's Handbook, pages 190-191.

Even if it wasn't in the book, "half your speed" so obviously mean "half you maximum speed" that it's maddening when people don't get this shit right.
You are grappling. A prone creature. What do you think she's supposed to do? Phase through you?

Fucking hell.

>>48971796

Note that your examples involve basically designing the entire adventure around the drow character. This isn't necessary with the normal core races.

And again I am not totally against drow as a race but they should be very much on a discretionary basis. Putting them in the PHB adds a whole entitlement complex around playing a challenging race.

>>48971842

I have no idea, honestly. It's a need to feel special or choose something that seems "cool" because humans are boring because peopel can't roleplay to make them interesting.

The vast majority of interesting TV show / movie / book characters are human. Yet in D&D I need to play a Thrikeen to be interesting or compelling? I know I am talking about two different things here but my point is still valid. My favorite characters were human ones, whereas I often forget the hordes of characters I've DMed for that were tieflings drow and dragonborn. Why? Because they had little to differentiate them besides being a certain race.

>>48971842

Also, they often want to play the "evil" or "edgy" races due to their experience being lolrandum murder hobos in Skyrim, without understanding that in an actual fantasy RPG that comes with a lot of challenges.

This could probably be a post of it's own, but DnD uses distances in feet and such all the time so I'll ask here.

I am completly retarded when it comes to distances, and when I plan games I have a hard time visualizing them.

Example: My players were attacking a fortified position and asked how far away the guard towers were. I said 20 feet, which seemed about right, then later realized a crossbow can shoot like 120 feet in 5E so my answer made no fucking sense.

So, can anyone who is good at this, give me some rough examples that I'd recognize from real life, to help me visualize distance.

For example, most PCs can move 30 feet in a couple seconds, how far is 30 feet? Is that like, running across a street, or is that like, running the length of a bus?

A crossbow can shoot about 120 ft, what does that about look like?

Is a ten foot ceiling pretty "normal" or would that be low in say, an American house.

What would a 60 foot cone shooting forward look like, distance wise.


tl;dr; Can't visualize distances because I'm bad at it, would love some examples.

>>48971691
Monks *start* at 1d4 damage. They cap at 1d10, which is the same as a longsword wielded with two hands, but without having to use two hands.

>>48971763
>If you let a pedophile

Bad analogy; a pedophile is an individual and so can be judged on his individual actions. What you're arguing for is more like saying that because a particular man is a pedophile, his brother must also be one. Or that because African-Americans are statistically more likely to commit crimes, it's okay to assume that each and every African-American is a criminal.

>Except the drow wouldn't even have been on the surface long enough to know Bob because unless he had a warband he probably would have been hunted down and killed.

See, at this point, you're just being difficult for the sake of difficulty. You're expecting an exacting amount of detail where it shouldn't be necessary.

"Our characters like Bob's character because we want to play the god damn game, asshole, not sit here arguing about racial issues. Mike met him at a tavern a year back while both were mostly drunk. Maybe we'll expand on that backstory if it becomes campaign relevant. Do you want it to? THEN LET US PLAY THE DAMN GAME SO IT CAN. Although first explain why the fuck it is you aren't giving so much shit about Mike's half-orc character."

>The PHB mentions none of that

It mentions exactly that, you motherfucking illiterate asshole. I even went to the trouble of screencapping it for you.

>Especially when they are so often on the receiving end of hatred
>On the receiving end of hatred
>receiving end
>of hatred

>>48971912
I want to deal a lot of consistent non-circumstantial damage thats unlikely to get resisted or blocked and can be applied from a distance.

The best thing I've found is a fighter using a heavy crossbow with the crossbow expert feat.

>>48971983
>>48971983

Yeah and fighter *starts* at 1d10 damage. Monk is effectively useless in comparison.

>>48971796
On the topic of roleplaying as Drow, are there any class subtypes that really compliment them? Maybe some sort of spider totem for a Barbarian?

>>48971913
But "half your speed" is absolutely not "half your maximum speed" or "half your base speed." There may be one special exception for when your speed is 0, but if your speed is reduced to any amount greater than 0, standing up takes half of your reduced speed. If a Ray of Frost reduces your speed from 30 feet to 20 feet, standing up only takes 10 feet of movement.

>>48971982
A football field is 300 feet.

A car is about 15 feet long. So 30 feet would be walking the length of two cars parked up against each other.

>>48971982
To be honest I have problems with this, too.

I don't work in feet. Even if it was in metres, I'd still get a bit confused.

>>48971885
In settings other than Faerûn, drow do not tend to be nearly as active, and so therefore surfacers encoutner them far less often and so are logically far less prone to attacking them on sight.

>>48971922
>Note that your examples involve basically designing the entire adventure around the drow character.

That's because you're insisting on making a huge deal about it.

>but they should be very much on a discretionary basis

THEY FUCKING ARE.
IT STATES OUTRIGHT THAT THEY FUCKING ARE, ON THE BASIS OF 1) DROW ADVENTURERS BEING RARE, AND 2) DROW NOT EXISTING IN ALL WORLDS
I SCREENCAPPED IT FOR YOU.
FUCK I AM GETTING MAD NOW.

File: Tighten.jpg (16KB, 210x236px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 210x236px

>>48971982
>tl;dr; Can't visualize distances because I'm bad at it, would love some examples.


I don't want to trigger your Agoraphobia or anything, but dust off the Cheetohs crumbs, walk or ride a bicycle down to your local sports field or highschool football field, and check out dem distances. Oh, and just in case you meet living people, take a shower first.


You can do it, I believe in you.

>>48971983
>Or that because African-Americans are statistically more likely to commit crimes, it's okay to assume that each and every African-American is a criminal.

It's more like, 90% of the time you see a black man, he is about to stab you.

This is fantasy, not real life. Drow are actually inherently evil.

> You're expecting an exacting amount of detail where it shouldn't be necessary.

No, I am expecting consistency and believability.

Half orcs have a different cultural background, they have integrated into human culture somewhat. I will agree that they should face more discrimination and unfriendliness than they do --- originally that was a hallmark of their race and it's been kind of left by the wayside since 3rd edition.

> Mike met him at a tavern a year back while both were mostly drunk.

But the drow would not even be allowed in a tavern. They are completely inconsistent with a fantasy civilization.

And by the way, if a village DIDN'T know what drow were and saw a jet black elf walk into a village, guess what they would assume? Same with a tiefling, they would think they are demonspawn.

>Especially when they are so often on the receiving end of hatred

They did not make it clear enough. Black men in the united states are often on the recieving end of hatred. Drow are literally not tolerated and will be chased out of town on a rail. This is extreme prejudice beyond anything in the modern first world.

>>48972012
There's a shadow sorcerer and deep stalker ranger in Unearthed Arcana that fit them well.

Trickery and death clerics fit them thematically.

Fiend warlocks, maybe

File: battlemap ex.png (1MB, 693x694px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 693x694px

>>48971908
They're in a huge forest, and it's low magic "you know nothing beyond the city borders" type exploration, so while they will find more intelligent enemies and they're chasing after a very intelligent wizard, it's mostly cursed humans, twisted experiments etc. for now. For terrain I'm not sure, I use battlemaps (R20) but not sure what more to do really or what other stuff to put on a map than what is there (pic is the generic forest battle map, for random encounters and stuff, they have buffalos that won't like getting close to enemies so things get a bit more interesting with them).

The enemies aren't usually beast-intelligence, it's just that they won't speak coherent sentences and such, so tactics aren't too much of an issue I think. I'll be a bit more optimal though, when those 5 hunters got surprise and had 2 attacks each I spread them out a lot to not just down someone instantly.

Maybe I just need to wait a bit for it to even out, on longer trips out in the wilderness they won't be able to use hit dice as much, exhaustion may build up (you get it from going unconscious, plus there's a berserker), and on longer days the cleric may use up too many spells before a battle making it harder.

>>48972002
Fighter doesn't get two d10s as a bonus action, both attacks forcing a saving throw that is
>Literally save or die (can stack with either of the other two)
>Knock over
>push so and so feet

Nor can they D10 at 60 feet
Or Burning Hands as a bonus action that can be upcast

Or water whip (which is 3d10 with a push/pull AND knock prone)

>>48972059
Unless anon walks around with a measuring stick that shit won't help.

>>48971982
I'm not sure what you mean by visualization. The distance is based on math.

Our DM has us use grid paper that's 5 feet per square when we play. You decide where things are in the environment and they move around based on that grid system. If it's in range, it's in range, if it isn't it isn't. If you want something to be inconveniently far away, keep weapon ranges in mind.

>>48971922
>Note that your examples involve basically designing the entire adventure around the drow character. This isn't necessary with the normal core races.

Yes a very short level 1 adventure I wouldn't require of my players, but would be helpful since you would like the characters to have concrete reasons to trust drow X you have so far seemed reluctant to just handwave them trusting the drow. If you have already decided that having a drow in the party is going to seriously impact every RP interaction anyways then it's not that far out to get the trust building session.

And some of those examples don't even really revolve around the drow that much, the first two in particular. Drow gives info and tags along with party is pretty much a normal adventure it's just that one of the characters has some useful info. Same as offering their help. They just know a little more than the rest of the party or have a helpful item or whatever. Sure, including them in the PHB can introduce challenges but I don't think it's a big deal for most groups. We have a tiefling in our group and while the DM is sure to point out all the dirty stares and poorly concealed whispers it doesn't impinge on adventuring that much overall.

>>48972012

Underdark/tunnel fighters from UA, ranger with spider friend, wizard with spider familiar, druid with spider form all come to mind as being very drow-ish. Assassin rogue too.

>>48972012
There was an UA with some underground fighting styles. Other than that, it's probably Death and Trickery clerics for females and fighters and hunter rangers for males. A drow barbarian would be practically unique. The underdark is not a kind place for a lone humanoid without ties to civilization. As they say, to walk apart from house and queen is to walk into the grave.

>>48972081
I generally agree with your sentiment but there's nothing stopping a fighter from using a heavy crossbow.

>>48972067
>But the drow would not even be allowed in a tavern.

YOU DON'T KNOW WHERE THE TAVERN IS.
MAYBE IT'S IN AN EVIL CITY OR A MERCENARY CAMP.
MAYBE IT WAS ON SIGIL.
MAYBE IT WAS ATTACHED TO A TEMPLE OF EILISTRAEE.
MAYBE THE OWNER OF THE TAVERN WAS HIMSELF A PROVEN-GOOD DROW TO THE LOCAL COMMUNITY AND BOB IS PLAYING HIS SON.
THIS. SHOULD NOT BE. THIS. DIFFICULT.

>>48972044
This, battlemaps are great for mechanical stuff like spell AoEs and stuff but even then it's hard to visualize how far 100 feet is. Not impossible, but it takes a bit of time with an example, measuring up in my head. Looking up stuff now and then helps though, like knowing that the horizon is usually 3 miles away on a clear day/flat land helps with knowing what the players see as they travel.

>>48972053
>IT STATES OUTRIGHT THAT THEY FUCKING ARE, ON THE BASIS OF 1) DROW ADVENTURERS BEING RARE, AND 2) DROW NOT EXISTING IN ALL WORLDS

It should mention that it's also because drow are completely intolerated on the surface in almost all regions.

Drow adventurers wouldn't even be that rare. Most drow would likely be higher level, they are a very powerful race. Orcs? Goblins? You can assume most of their soldiers are 1st or 2nd level. Same with humans and dwarves, but drow? A lot of them are low level but they have shittons more high level spellcasters and rogues than most races do.

And yes, drow do not exist in all worlds. Neither do dwarves. I don't remember any elves in Chronicles of Narnia, or gnomes in Lord of the Rings. It's just stating the obvious.

Would a scroll of haste be usable by a bard?
Are there any magic items that would be good to cover the fact that a bard has no haste for whatever reason?
Who decided Counterspell shouldn't be a bard available spell without secrets?

>>48972067
>drow are inherently evil

But that's wrong.

A fiend is inherently evil.

A drow isn't inherently evil, but are very, very likely to become evil due to their ways and society.

If you read the PHB, it says 'Drow are more often evil than not.'

>>48970804
Based on this description, it is hard to tell but certainly in the LG to TN area. He created his own ideals and seems to prize those (which is more Chaotic), but seems to be working from things within authority systems (which is Lawful), so I'd say Neutral on the L-C axis. He is striving for harmony between civilization and nature so both can thrive (pretty Good) and in equality of opportunity (pretty Good).

I'd say he is actually NG, but it is highly dependent on what methods he considers acceptable. As it stands, is probably somewhere in the top two-thirds of alignment, certainly not Evil.

>>48972081
>Or Burning Hands as a bonus action that can be upcast

So the subtlety of the monk has been completely abandoned. Wonderful.

So glad I don't use a setting where the morality of the average drow could cause this much of an argument.

>>48970851
Is there a way to hide them without reporting them? I'm not good at differentiating between the early posts of someone who is legitimately frustrated or is being a troll.

>>48972169
I await your reaction to that archetype's super saiyan feature.

>>48972144
I've made a sort of house with enough room for people to mess about in and get details by each square having its own colour, but then I had a player comment on the size of the place.

It's hard to fit in a lot of detail without scaling things down a bit.

I think it's sometimes nice to assume that it's okay if the grid is actually 3ft by3ft squares, bu functionally those 3ft are 5ft squares, as it doesn't make much different in a close situation like inside a house.

Not to mention, you can easily fit mulitple poeple onto a 5ft square, which makes things more confusing, especially if you have a shieldwall.

So I sometimes make shieldwall creatures two creatures/square.

>>48968163
Am I missing something? It was about DM creating his own stuff with the setting and the player's backstories before with more or less sandbox or custom stories. Nowadays it seems everyone just buys the new adventure and "run" it. Other systems have this trend too but I see it most for D&D. What the hell?

>>48972059
Or he could get a measuring tape. He could even order it online. Zero risk.

>>48972079
For terrain I mean things like ravines, ledges, fallen trees blocking a path, maybe a fire that spreads each turn, or a near-feral druid who tree-strides around the players while commanding the wildlife to attack. Just brainstorm (over the course of a day or a week or however you want to) a bunch of ways the terrain can help or hinder the players and their enemies, then toss one or two in random encounters when you feel they need to be spiced up.

If they're in the woods it might not hurt to introduce some sort of mysterious tree-killing disease, or encounters where animals are killed but left untouched for reasons unknown (or, alternately, set up in bizarre rituals). Build up some mystery and don't have every random encounter be a straight fight.

>>48972156
That's true; there's always been a small minority of non-evil drow ever since Drizzt. But imagine that you're a human guard and you see a drow mucking around on the surface. How much are you willing to risk in the name of modern cultural values that your culture probably doesn't even have? The risk that you'll hurt the feelings of one of the fraction of a percent of the drow population that isn't evil don't compare well to the risk that the drow is some kind of scout or spy who wants to kill you and enslave your children.

>>48972202
Anecdotally, people buy these adventures and then tweak them to their own tastes. Few run them completely as written.

>>48972169
Depends on the monk kit. Open hand is still subtle. Sun Soul is pretty much Goku: the Kit, complete with Super Saiyan as a capstone.

Funnily enough, different people have different ideas about what constitutes a monk and what doesn't, and WotC finds it beneficial to cater to different people's views on that for the purposes of book sales.

File: image.jpg (82KB, 562x902px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 562x902px

>>48972116
Loading does, honestly.
But with monks being a squishy d8 class, their avialability to a lot more damage options is fair without being full casters.
I like fighters more for games I play simply because I can never find a good setting to monk it up in without being the whacky weeb.
Also holy shit 4Elm Monks need a hardcore a-fixing. They made an entire player's companion for elemental spells and the monk class that specifies in it gets goddamn NOTHING, even though basic "bending"- THE ENTIRE BASIS OF THE PATH- is right there under cantrips.

Unrelated note, what's a good pair of spells for Lore Bard's first secrets for a 2 Barbarian, Nature Cleric, and divination Wizard party?

>>48972227
>But imagine that you're a human guard

But I'm not a human guard. I'm a half-orc monk. And if I can be different, why can't the drow?

Now, obviously, yes, I should go up to the drow and figure out if everything's on-the-level, but I should not make a priori assumptions. That's not very Buddha of me.

>be me
>love 5e
>animal companion ranger has always been a favorite archetype
>rangers suck in 5e

what do?

>>48972197
Yeah 5 ft. is pretty big, even halflings and gnomes being 5 ft. wide is so weird to get used to, and large creatures taking 4x the spaces also makes them really big, while most buildings and stuff aren't very big at all when it's scaled to 5 ft. squares.

>>48972219
Yeah I'll probably do more planned encounters so I can do that kind of stuff, more complex strategies, involvement with terrain and other goals etc. I think the players will assume everything to be evil but I'll see I guess. Thanks.

>>48972273
Loading isn't an issue since fighters get more ASIs and can take crossbow expert.

On that note, I really love that monk doesn't feel like it needs any particular feat to be optimal.

>>48972059
Eh I have to spend a fair amount of time outside for work, I just have a hard time with mental images. I tend to think in words with no pictures, (it's the same reason I'm terrible at drawing anything) so if someone says "Oh the walk is about five miles" I have a super hard time imagining what that looks like, I just see the words "five miles"

It's why comparing things helps, someone else in this thread already said "30 feet is about two cars next to each other" that's super helpful to me because they are pretty small and easy to picture. Scale up to like a football field or a track stretched out and I start to lose it again.

>>48972114
Could fit a Drow Gladiator in a way.

>>48972320
>Be fighter
>Buy and train a dog
>???
>Profit

>>48972333
>not getting Mobile on your monk
>or FUCKING MAGIC INITIATE (DRUID) FOR YOUR 4E MONK SO YOU CAN DO YOUR PATH FEATURES PROPERLY

>>48972333

I think monks need a bit of a tweak defensively. I'm playing a mobile monk and it feels like any other monk is not as fun or powerful to play.

>>48972197
The 5' is supposed to represent an area of space needed to fight effectively in a heroic skirmish, it's not supposed to represent a Roman shield wall or how many halflings you can jam in a phone booth.
It's the amount of space needed to swash buckles without cramping your style. And as the rules state, even Large creatures can fight in a 5' wide hall, but attacks on them are advantage, as they lack room to maneuver.

Get over it. And stop muddying up the rules with your autism.

>>48972375
>>or FUCKING MAGIC INITIATE (DRUID) FOR YOUR 4E MONK SO YOU CAN DO YOUR PATH FEATURES PROPERLY
Explain?

File: 1377323612135.png (64KB, 319x304px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 319x304px

>>48972342
>Eh I have to spend a fair amount of time outside for work, I just have a hard time with mental images.
>like, I just see the words "five miles"

And you think we can fix that by typing more words at you?
Anon, I think you might just be retarded and it's been hidden from you.

>>48972121

> maybe maybe maybe maybe

This is all in opposition to the more likely and common "probably"

And again, you are asking me to change where the campaign starts, to accomodate one player? Seems awfully selfish to me. If it was all drow or mostly drow we'd start in fucking Menzoberanzan, but that's not the situation here.

>>48972227
A normal human guard in a not incredibly high fantasy setting will probably go:

'Okay, I see.. a dark elf? I should go question them, this is weird.'
rather than
'PURGE THE UNCLEAN'

And even fi they were familiar with drow, they'd probably do something more like:
'I'm going to call for back-up and we can surround them, capture them and bring them in for questioning.'

>>48972227
Playing in Forgotten Realms was merely your first mistake.

>>48972189

I don't even want to look at it, to be honest. Sorry. I'm sure I would rage hard, though. More pandering by Mearls to weeb shits to get as many people playing 5e as possible, no matter how much we don't want those people in our hobby.

>>48972156

They are inherently evil leading to a society of evil. One comes from the other, anon. They chose to make the society this way. It isn't like black culture in America where poverty and racism turns a lot of them into criminals. That was not a conscious choice on black peoples' part. It was for drow. They purposely perpetuate their evil cycle.

Drow like Drizzt are abominations. remember that Drizzt and Zaknafein were the only two good drow that show up in the entire Drizzt series.

That doesn't mean chaotic evil kill everything on sight, but they are all evil. And they would all be attacked on the surface because of their actions to that end.

>>48972170

What setting do you use?

>>48972427
But I can't just make a typical small room only allow two creatures in it.
What if the rogue wants to get in there and stab somebody?

Or are we forever doomed to making giant halls for everybody to fight in, and that nobody can ever fight in a sort of peasant-sized house?

>>48972273

> different of 1 hp per level
> squishy

LMAOing at D&D's shitty balance

>>48972449
He means getting Shillelagh, though that still leaves the unarmed strikes from MA and FoB behind.

File: Areyouamagnet.jpg (77KB, 531x513px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 531x513px

>>48972515
The small room you are in now isn't 10'x10', unless you are typing from a small bathroom.

If your dungeon is composed of cubicles I guess that would be a problem.

You aren't the spacial distance retard are you?

File: image.jpg (93KB, 320x720px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 320x720px

>>48972449
Four Elements monks are based on the Bending aspect of Avatar, the Last Airbender, a western cartoon where they used supernatural martial arts to manipulate the Earth, Air, Fire, and Water (and elements that came thereof in some cases) around them.
The Elemental Evil Player's companion had a bunch of cantrips and spells that fit the four elements monk's Schtick perfectly, up to including Control Water, bend wind, move earth, and manipulate fire, which were At-will cantrips that you can use to manipulate those four elements (and other elements in odd circumstances).
However, four elements monks have no support in this book at all, meaning all these perfectly thematic cantrips and spells go completely to waste for the monk unless they dip or Magic Initiate.
Druid gets all four of the suspect cantrips and is a wisdom caster, just like four elements monks.

>>48972533
Difference of 1-4 HP of the stronger classes HP wise.
Honestly I like an all d8 party.

>>48972555
I bet that guy has his mind blown realizing that a decent sized living room is 20'x30', (4x6 squares).

And also my groovy trips.

>>48972280
Half-orcs should also be the target of some prejudice; it's written right into every description I've ever seen of both races. Half-orcs are more common than drow in surface cities, so a half-orc is not a cause for immediate alarm, but it's often assumed that interacting with a half-orc will result in the half-orc throwing some kind of temper tantrum or committing a petty crime. And people are fine reducing the risk of getting mugged even if it means reducing the chance of making friends with the one nice half-orc in the city.

>>48972027
You are making so much sense. I mean if you're hit by a ray of frost making all of your movements slower, it only makes sense that standing up takes less effort than when you're nice warm and cosy at home.

:-)

File: 039404f5e96ff2574bc7ff679ce7d6a5.jpg (33KB, 400x387px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 400x387px

>>48972647
Half Orcs are the equivalent of a guy with a notorious Biker Club leather jacket and outfit coming into your store.
Dark Elves are the equivalent of this guy.

But hey, he might have reformed or something!

>>48972513
>poverty and racism
That's what people want you to believe.
I am of the belief that black africans are typically more aggressive by nature, which is somewhat like a drow. Of course, you can easily have a white man more aggressive than a black one, or a black man of peace, but they are somewhat similar.

I'm not sure if the lore has changed, but in places where drow don't raid I'm still doubtful people will have such a stigma about them. Even if they are wary, they should rather question a lone drow as to what they're doing in case they're a scout for a bigger raid. Torture may insue, but something such as a 'zone of truth' may give them passage.

>>48972636
>>48972555
>implying people don't live in houses with bedrooms maybe 10 feet by 15 feet or so large in modern times in first-world countries
>implying that in, say, victorian times in a city, you wouldn't be cramming as much as two families into perhaps two rooms

>>48971369
Mold Earth and Shape Water are wonderful. Historically, moats were a dual-edged sword because while they improved the defenses, they also bred disease due to stagnant water. A living moat, one fed and drained by a river, has all the advantages of the moat but is far cleaner. Mold Earth allows for a canal to be started, then Shape Water is used to further cut it.

Do note that while Wall of Stone is great for initial building, the walls aren't strong enough for the best defenses. They are most useful for temporary fixes, rapid creation of concentric layers to create kill-zones, and temporary reinforcement of actual walls. They are best when combined with other materials to create a stronger surface, which is where those two cantrips also come in handy.

Use Wall of Stone to create wall forms. Then, use Mold Earth to dig out ditches that can be trapped and fill the forms. Once you have Mud to Stone, turn it into feet of solid stone.

>>48972675
A lot of D&D rules bend common sense for the sake of fun. Making it slightly easier to stand up under certain rare circumstances makes the game a touch more fun because it increases everyone's ability to do things other than crawling or flopping around helplessly.

>>48972239
whats the point then?

>>48971641
The tiefling rogue in my party actually did that. It's how my character found out he's a tiefling.

>>48972920
Having the groundwork laid out for you. Given how dirt cheap you can get some adventures, spending a few dollars to save potentially 2-5 hours of planning is a tradeoff some people are willing to make.

>>48972502
what do you play in?