D&D 5e General /5eg/

Can anyone recommend some software to make editable PDFs?

I'm making some custom character sheets but want to be able to edit the entered data more easily.

File: 1450016476584.jpg (291KB, 950x1463px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 950x1463px

So druid edition I guess?
How do you guys manage to motivate your druid characters? Personally, I want to run one who cares less about 'nature' and more about the resident spirits in wherever they are, serving their needs and keeping them healthy, whether that means protecting a forest or cleaning up a city. Animism seems like a much cooler source of power to me than the default "Muh pure primal nature energy"

>>49175362
I'm sure it's someone's fetish.

>>49175576
Shaman class/archetype when?

Question for anyone who got the roll20 version of Storm King's Thunder: Was/is there any preperations you still had/have to do other than preparing music perhaps? Do you have any complains about it so far?

>>49175611
There are a shit ton of shaman homebrews man just use google.

File: 1442190675946.png (84KB, 599x717px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 599x717px

>>49175598

I know for a fact it's mine, playing the gruff guardian-type with a soft spot for his charge is just my kind of character.

By default, should druids/wizards/sorcerers/warlocks be able to use their staff (spellcasting focus) as a quarterstaff?

>>49175576
I tend to have my druid characters motivated by things completely unrelated to their nature abilities, and have them not even acknowledge any common factour between their abilities. More like an emotional connection to what "is natural" and what isn't driven by their philosophy towards others.

>>49175576
I try to treat Druidism less like a profession and more like a skill that frequently LEADS to a common profession.
Just how clerics can do all kinds of different things while still being clerics and Paladins can do all kinds of different things while still being Paladins.

>>49175576
I would still love to make an evil druid character who is all for the gruesome nature of... well nature. Totally anti civilization to the point of burning down shit just for fun, I think its way to idiotic character to play in a group tho.

>>49175751
FR and classic D&D called them "Shadow" Druids, usually.
Deities like Malar, God of primal hunting, violence, and mindless savagery are great for that and many worshippers of his are Druids of different kinds.

>>49167381
>>49167400
>>49168501
>>49168646
>>49169359

Thanks, anons. I will try these out and cook somethin' up. Sadly won't meet my nephew until later this weekend but I should be ready with something at least! Thanks!

>>49175703
Anon I think he meant an official WotC Shaman class. [Spoiler]Homebrews either become horribly OP or incredibly underwhelming.[/spoiler]

>>49175751
The burning things down sounds dumb from a PC perspective unless your party is evil. I have a more savage druid that views humanoids as more clever but destructive animals so he won't always put much effort or care if people die.

Forest fires are actually good for a forest, and if too many predatory animals are killed the prey species overpopulate and can become sick/ starve so you can "cull" creatures. Since in campaigns you hang around populated areas you can become a bane to the local racoon population if it's doing to well. You can be a druid whose a bit of a cunt, you just have to rationalize it in a bigger picture type of way when it comes to balance in nature.

Town is over populated and you have intel about an incoming attack the party forgets to share, or doesn't know about yet? Don't tell anyone.

File: 13130161447302296855.jpg (65KB, 402x666px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 402x666px

>>49175939
I imagine him thinking that the weak are parasites, who only survive because of a "flaw" in the world called civilization and that his ultimate goal is to bring an end to all that is dependent on its rules. But yea he would be super impractical as a player,.

>>49175729
Casters ought to be able to use whatever they think is cool as a spellcasting focus. It's such a minor thing mechanically to begin with.

>>49176172
That would well for an evil druid.

Mine just views civilized sorts as "herd" animals like deer that use safety in numbers, but also have ant like behaviour in terms of hives and the advantage of intelligence. Too many advantages for selfish creatures. I'm a little worried my DM and party won't put in effort to keep him from hating everything. It's a fun character, but anything beyond generic hippy druid is a bit more difficult with long term party dynamics.

>>49176275
I still love the Magical Tattoo idea, untill my char would take dmg ofc.

>>49175729
They might need to do some setup to change spellcasting focus if their old one gets destroyed or something.

>>49176275
>>49175729
i feel as though unless its clearly minmaxing, focuses should be handwaved as long as they own/have access one.
if a cleric has a shield, he has the options for brazier, necklance, and shield emblem
why would he ever pick something other than emblem
on that note, why would he ever pick brazier, which is clearly the mechanically worse of the three

but for your specific question, yes, if they choose to use a fancy stick as their focus, then they can hit things with the stick. its magic, it shouldnt break

>>49176490
You can't "min/max" something so fucking worthlessly minute a mechanical thing mane.
Focuses and material components exist for fluff, not to mechanically limit you. If someone wants to use x - WHATEVER x actually is - as a spellcasting focus, just let them. It makes virtually no difference mechanically.

>>49176303
>I still love the Magical Tattoo idea, untill my char would take dmg ofc.

I created a wizard that used every inch of his body to tattoo his most valued spells on himself. He could put about 20 levels worth of spells on himself, and fireball took most of his head.

He walked around shirtless off course, boasting his sweet ink and uncannily high wizard strength.

>>49176562
i more mean minmax in the sense of a person trying to abuse those ignored rules
say, a person two weapon fighting, switching to a 2hand and casting an attack cantrip or something as an opportunity attack
like, as long as the person is just using two hands, and isnt just fucking around with 8 pieces of gear in them, i dont care what they do

>>49176562
>>49176490

Hand occupation and item interaction is a big deal, even object durability can be sometimes. Martials shouldn't be the only ones scrutinized in this regard.

File: Musclewizard.jpg (35KB, 480x246px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 480x246px

>>49176666
With the power of my awesome guns I invoke my greatest enchantment. FIST!

File: farty cat-dragon.jpg (286KB, 712x921px) Image search: [Google]

286KB, 712x921px

Speaking of druids. Would your DM allow a moon druid to wildshape into the dreaded fart-cat?

>>49176725
Those rules don't really change anything at all. The vast majority of material components that spells are attached to are just due to historically those spells having had one by iconic casters. But here's the thing - virtually every caster - especially the non-wizards - are unique and don't cast spells all perfectly the same way. That includes material components and spellcasting focuses.

>>49176732
It's not a big deal. The "biggest" deal it can possibly be is if a caster uses a shield as a focus and has to use a free action to stow their weapon on turns where they cast spells with somatic and material components. And that has the mechanical impact of not letting the caster make attacks of opportunity until the next round. Ooooh noooo.

>>49175729
STAFFS

Unless a staff's description says otherwise, a staff can
be used as a quarterstaff.

-dmg

>>49176817
Not every spell list can use shields as a focus. Only holy ones.

Opportunity attacks are nothing to sneeze at for casters at lower levels(druids, bards and clerics can be quite decent at melee), every bit helps. At higher level, what magic items you're holding is a huge deal, since you don't want to drop n' draw them.

>>49177210
If you're *NOT* wearing a shield, it's even *LESS* of a problem, because you're able to actually stow your damn focus.

>>49175532
You can save a Google Doc as a pdf. It's how I've been backing up my stuff for the past month or so.

File: 1454462294072.png (211KB, 301x287px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 301x287px

>>49177256
>someone saying holy focuses are bad around me
>mfw

Shields are an important source of defense for all non-wizard/sorcerer magic users, having one as a focus is a huge boon. At least you're not a bard, a lot of DMs say you gotta play that shit with both hands or with your mouth(that means no V if he's playing RAW).

>>49177596
>implying I'm saying holy focuses are bad when this *entire* conversation has simply been that material components that don't have a cost and thus spellcasting focuses are an almost completely irrelevant game mechanic to begin with
Keep up gnome.

>>49177596
>a lot of DMs say you gotta play that shit with both hands
What on earth? The rules are pretty clear that the instrument is just a focus, same as a symbol or staff. Fluffing somantic/verbal components as playing it are fine, but who requires it? Do they make wizards suck off their wands to cast them?

>>49177644
It's all fine and sandy having no difference in focuses until you find a magical focus that you want the cleric to be able to use but not the wizard

>>49177678
My casters all have obsidian dildos as their arcane focus. They all add double my proficiency to fucking you in the ass, dealing force and psychic damage.

>>49177671
>Charisma is your spellcasting ability for your bard
spells. Your magic comes from the heart and soul you
pour into the performance of your music and oration.
You use your Charisma whenever a spell refers to your
spellcasting ability.

Pretty clear cut that bards perform to cast spells, not DBZ bullshit.

>>49175576
my druid's a mailman. part of a secret society within the mailmen guild who protect the flow of information through the world and seek to shut down anything that hinders that flow.
he uses his druidic powers to help him while he's travelling through the wilderness, delivering mail.

>>49177733
That's fluff. The rules are that they can use an instrument as an arcane focus, and that merely requires being held in one hand. Besides, you can take instruments that can be played with one hand. Are those supposed to be better than 'two handed' instruments for no reason?

>>49177326
I'm creating my own printable character sheet PDF in adobe illustrator. I want to be able to edit them after the fact vs. editing text on top after each little change. I've seen lots of custom character sheets with radio buttons and text fields, I just can't figure out what people use.

Can someone post pictures of King Hekaton, Queen Neri, and their kids from Storm King's Thunder?

File: skelebard.jpg (133KB, 467x533px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 467x533px

I fucking hate scumbag casters that want to hand wave all the rules for how they cast spells, but would have a shitfit if a two-weapon rogue dared to draw two weapons at once without the feat.

>>49177785
It's not "fluff", it's how you cast your damn spells you insufferable casual. You don't just shoot fireballs out of your bagpipes while you swing them through the air like a girl's shirt at a KISS concert.
Yes, some instruments are better for combat brawls. Bagpipes aren't practical since they use two hands and your mouth, and droning is quite annoying especially indoors. Horns are nice, although they still use your mouth/hand instead. But most DMs allow for the V/M of bards to combine if it's a wind instrument since it's part of the performance.

File: 1428972179432.jpg (232KB, 1024x1395px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 1024x1395px

>>49178060
Please, give me the sentence that states that a bard can't cast a spell without playing an instrument, because all I can find is "You can use a musical instrument (found in Chapter 5) as a spellcasting focus for your bard spells."

Obviously it's implied that they play the instrument. The game mechanics say that they need to be able to speak to perform verbal components, and a focus can circumvent material requirements. If this means that the bard's verbal components are music from their horn, and the somantic is the fingering, and the material is their bagpipe, that's fine and dandy. But there's no need to restrict the player by saying they can't use their other free hand, or else you're stifling the player by making it more efficient to use a one handed instrument like a bugle or pan flute.

File: Human Wizard.jpg (4MB, 2560x1440px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 2560x1440px

Say I want to make a Wizard and focus on Conjuration/Transmutation. Which is the better school to make my subclass, and what are some of the most synergistic/have the most potential spells to pick? Also, is their a better feat to pick (variant human level 3) besides spell sniper? Trying to go for that Wizard that is in the party to find new magic and try to discover/develop what he can. Kinda wants a trick for most situations, and likes to fuck with peasants, but isn't really evil or particularly murder-y.

>>49178060
>I fucking hate scumbag casters that want to hand wave all the rules for how they cast spells, but would have a shitfit if a two-weapon rogue dared to draw two weapons at once without the feat.


>Be forever-dm
>Playing at my flgs with a regular group
>New guy wants to join, says he has played past D&D games.
>Plays Wizard.
>Combat starts and out fighter goes into battle.
>New Guy "You can't start with both your mace and your shield, you can only drawn one at the start of each turn." :^)
>Tell him he's technically right but I never gave too much of a damn for that rule cause it's pointless really.
>"But it's the ruuuules!"
>Play along with it.
>"I cast Lightning Bolt!"
>"Do you have the correct components?"
>"What?"
>"Do you have a bit of fur and a rod of amber, crystal, or glass?"
>"No... but I have a component pouch."
>"What's specifically in this pouch?"

I know I was being "That GM" but I fucking hate when people I do not know come to join our group and straight off push to change how we play to cater to their wants. Never saw him again after that.

>>49178478
He deserves it for not just using a focus. There's no reason for a pure caster to use a component pouch over a focus.

>>49178478
>you can only draw one at the start of each turn

A shield takes a whole fucking action to 'draw'.

Not to mention, a shield is typically regarded as a piece of armour, and thus is typically considered already worn. Weapons - on the other hand - are considered not at-the-ready in any situation characters didn't expect very likely combat to occur in.
And that's just one object interaction.

If you play by the rules, that guy was just wrong.
However,
>what's specifically in this pouch
It is assumed there is a bit of fur and a rod of amber/crystal/glass in the components pouch.
But he should know and state that.

>>49178516
There's not awfully significant reason to usea focus over a component pouch, either.

Mostly fluff.

>>49178516
True enough. Generally I am pretty lax on this rules. Obviously if you have been silenced and you want to cast a verbal spell I won't let you. But I can rationalize a rogue being able to draw two daggers at once or a Fighter being able to quickly equip sword and shield. Only times I actually enforce these rules is if they were asleep when being attacked and so they are left unarmored and ill equipped to fight.

>>49178478
No, you were just being "That GM". There's no real "but" to that situation. Two wrongs don't make a right.

>>49178562
You're correct and I am fully aware of how to component pouch worked, I gave the guy a hard time because we didn't know him and he felt it was needed to tell us we should change how we play when I already stated we did not care for the specific rule. Bitter, I know.

As for the shield counting as always worn, never thought of it exactly like that before. If I do ever come across a scenario though where a player wants to equip a random shield they found in the midst of combat I guess I will make it take a full action.

>>49178692
>Two wrongs don't make a right.
It does when the party has a good laugh about it after :^)

>>49178478
...why did you play along with it? Just assume the fighter's shield was already on like you always do and let him use the pouch how it says on the box.
You just served to let him disrupt play then do it yourself. Hell, he had half a point if the fighter was doing something with that arm before battle. You just broke RAW.

File: latest.jpg (17KB, 510x382px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 510x382px

How would you stat the Son of a Shepherd?

New to the system and I'm playing a character from an old game converted. The 3 big things he had going for him was divine magic, a greatsword he actually used and angelic wings. Thoughts on classes that can accomplish this?

>>49178770
The player's a bit of a loser if they whine about a ruling after it has been decided (suggesting 'oh, this isn't the rules.' is fine, then trying to argue it normally isn't if it's something minor), but I think it's generally good to stick to the rules.

If you cut corners too often, it can sometimes lose some of the depth to the game.

If a rogue can't draw both their weapons at once, it forces them to think 'oh, maybe I should pull out a crossbow, or take out only one weapon, hide and then attack or just use my bonus action for anything else at all', a bit rather than following a routine.

As long as I don't hear you catch your players unarmoured in the night too often, I think things are okay anyway.

>>49178905
fuck off

>>49178922
A paladin. The angelic wings thing may be a problem but they've got the divine magic and greatsword down pat.

>>49178922
Oath of vengeance paladin.

>divine magic
>greatswording if you want
>angelic wings at level 18... If you make it that far.

>>49178922
Devotion Paladin if your DM is cool
Vengence Paladin if you know your goign to hit 20

File: tumblr_mz1j3mwoSM1sjc743o1_500.gif (413KB, 500x360px) Image search: [Google]

413KB, 500x360px

>>49178945
No.

>>49178905
Human variant (tavern brawler), far traveler background, barbarian (totem warrior, w/custom sea cucumber totem)

16 str, 12 dex, 14 con, 8 int, 14 wis, 10 cha.

>>49178946
Oath of vengeance, baby

>>49178946
>>49178950
The wings and magic are the most important because he got them both from drinking the blood of the god of wind and seas. The greatsword is removable though, are there any classes that get flight at low levels that I could refluff?

>>49175703
Yeah but are any of them actually good?

I'm working on running a one shot for some friends who have never played a tabletop game before. I want to keep things as simple for them as I can so I'm going to pre make characters for them to pick from, with one character for each class.

In the dungeon I want to have an intro fight, the middle part, and then the "boss fight" at the end. In the middle part I want to make it more puzzle and exploratory instead of just fighting. I had thought about making the party go through rooms that were designed so that one character would be much better at solving it than others (for example, having a room full of traps for the rogue to disarm).

The players would only enter the rooms that corresponded to the characters in the party and I'm looking for suggestions on what kind of puzzle I could design for each class

>>49179040
Aarakokra race, Winged tiefling variant race and storm sorcerer (!), eagle barbarian are the only ways you'll get low level flight.
Aarakokra has ridiculous speed at about 50ft or something, winged tiefling is just 30ft, storm sorcerer technically doesn't have wings or a fly speed but can be refluffed so they have wings that only work for a moment after casting spells.
Basically, they fly for a short period of time after a spell.
Eagle barbarian is very similar, but non-magical for sure, only works while raging and only in short bursts again.

If you can start with an uncommon magical item, you may be able to refluff the 'winged boots' to suit your needs.

>>49179116
Storm sorcerer sounds best. I imagine they get bonuses to lightning spells to suit the whole god of wind and sea thing?

File: slidepuzzle-finish-247x307.gif (6KB, 247x307px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 247x307px

>>49179055
I know you didn't ask for this but I would suggest doing a session zero where you help the players make their characters. 1, it teaches them how to make a character and some intro to playing and 2, players will always have more fun playing their own created characters than someone elses. Also be sure to add enough magical items so each character will get 1, make it cool as well cause everyone loves loot.

As for puzzle? Slider puzzles are always fun.

>>49179055
I personally think that sounds really lame, and the party should instead think amongst themselves who would be best at what. Still, I'm not a new player.

Your main difficulty is going to be with, say, a fighter or barbarian.Their best bets are to lift boulders - you'd have to give them some sort of backstory feature ( a fighter - battlemaster for example gets a tool proficiency, or their racial might give them something) that can be used, but isn't obviously 'HEY BATTLEMASTER I GAVE YOU BRINK LAYING PROFICEINCY AND THERE'S A WALL HERE AND SOME BRICKS AND MORTAR GUESS WHAT THE PUZZLE IS'

>>49179153
Eh. They get some flavour stuff, but if you want a straight-up damage boost .. They might gte one, butI think that's more dragon sorcerer territory.

I believe the storm sorcerer is in the waterbourne adventures thing, so you'd best look for it in there and see i you like it.

File: 1437961100052.jpg (330KB, 1024x680px) Image search: [Google]

330KB, 1024x680px

>>49178516
>>49178478
>>49178060
>>49177785
>>49177733
>>49177671
holy fuck you guys are a bunch of retards
>need two hands to play
you can stow a weapon and then DRAW YOUR INSTRUMENT AS PART OF YOUR SPELL FUCK

All this talk on stowing and drawing weapons now really has me asking this question. If you're a rogue with two daggers tucked into your belt, would it not make sense that you can reasonably draw both just by using each hand to grab one then pull them out? It's not actually like it's a difficult action to perform.

>>49179275
Exactly. You need one (1) free hand to use a spellcasting focus. There are no more rules about a bard having to play an instrument that serves as their focus than there are about a warlock shoving their rod up their arse to use it as theirs.

>>49179405
You did not read that errata about the warlock? Its in bro

>>49179405
>he didn't read that fiend warlocks have to have a demonic buttplug in order to regenerate their pact magic feature

Fucking warlocks
Always trying to make people forget about the rules to save their own arses.

>>49179405
You're technically right, the best kind of right. However we can assume a bard must play their instrument in order to cast a spell simply cause the Bard fluff is that their magic comes from their music. But that's just assuming of course. Reasonably it should just be left at the GM's discretion.

>>49179427
>>49179453
Guys, I'm running a fey warlock. The thing-ring is much easier to deal with.
>>49179496
Their magic doesn't just come from music, it also comes from their "wishes" and "oration" according to the PHB.

>>49179496
The problem is that if at any point playing an instrument becomes much more troublesome than the bard just using a component pouch, they'll just go for the component pouch.

>>49179583
That's where if I was a DM I would just tell the Bard's that their source of magic comes from the "art" they are proficient in. I don't have the PHB on me now so I can reread Bards. I know the DM in one campaign I played it let our Bard use his Greataxe as his instrument because it was both an Axe and a Guitar.

Was actually pretty metal.

>>49179496
Does that mean you can't play a 2H Valor bard? Or do you just whistle Neverwinter Nights style?

>>49179754
Depends on the GM and how he interprets the plot.
Right now we have a Valor Bard with a longsword in our group that's a Skald from Norland and he uses uses his sword in two hands.

>>49180135
>how he interprets the rules
I meant.

>>49175576
The class should be renamed to Sage instead of Druid.
When someone says Druid you immediately think of either Celtic priests or Shapeshifting mages of nature.

When someone says Sage... well the term encompasses a far broader concept.

>>49180284
>Shapeshifting mages of nature
... which is exactly what druids are?

File: image.jpg (79KB, 744x930px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 744x930px

>>49175483
How to do an evil monk well? Beyond just treating ki as a source of evil power.

>>49176806
I thought wildshape only went up to cr 3 monsters

>>49180311
Moon druids can turn into a beast whose CR is equal to their druid level divided by 3, so at 12th they can turn into CR 4 beasts.

>>49175576
My druid is A monk who being somehow unable to train his ki decided to seek out different forms of magic instead.
He found his way with a group of sages who observe and study nature to master it's powers and maintain its balance.
So he's traveling the world seeking out and destroying those that taint nature through negative magical energies so he can gain more power.

>>49175729
Yes they should be able to use a quarter staff as focus.

As far as I'm concerned every caster should be able to pick any melee weapon as a focus as long as they have it silvered or enchanted with at least a minor magical effect.>>49175737

>>49180302
By treating the ki as a source of evil power.

Dude it's a fucking arpeggie, make this shit up until it sounds fucking baller. Be some sort of "Kill Destroy" inversion of Buddhism like the bad guys from Karate Kid.

>>49180302
That's ridiculously easy.
Basically, stop treating a Monks as LITERAL monks; even the culture the invented the concept of fantasy warriors who used ki didn't do that. It was just a skill, and like any other skill anyone on earth could learn to use it and then do whatever they wanted with it at all. Like learning to fight with a sword, only more complex and involved.
Monestaries might be a reliable place to find training, but not the ONLY one. Ever heard of the "wandering incognito kungfu master" thing?

If you have to have them be Monks, associate them with an evil religion; one of my group's recurring foes is a Monk of Bane who I'd originally planned as a one and done threat but the group enjoyed his vaguely Darth Maul-inspired presence so much that he kept coming back.

>>49180518
>one of my group's recurring foes is a Monk of Bane who I'd originally planned as a one and done threat but the group enjoyed his vaguely Darth Maul-inspired presence so much that he kept coming back.

I think I remember you coming on here and posting about that some months ago, that sounds vaguely familiar.

>>49176740
Is there actually a good "I cast fist" build for casters?

>>49180606
http://dndmagic.com/?id=31

Im a first time DM getting ready for his first Adventure with a group of 3 players who are familiar with the game (they've played a bit).
im currently pouring over the DMs guide and have read through the MM and Players Guide.
i have a decent if basic first go Adventure in my head buts its not committed to paper yet
im nervous about making sure the rules and rolls are followed though and making sure to keep it engaging and entertaining
any tips?

Is it alright to disclose the DC for saving throws? Like say they need to roll n to succeed this Strength saving throw so they can withstand the gust of wind that might push them off the high cliff they are at.

I want to be impartial to certain mechanics like hiding DC for skil checks to maintain a certain immersion that and if they were told that, say, a wooden door needs DC 20 to break open it will gve away that there is indeed something special about the door instead of finding that out for themselves as characters vs as players. Stil, however, I do feel that something like the number of a saving throw DC is something they should know at least esp if its something lethal.

>>49181150
If you feel comfortable with your party knowing, then say it. That all comes down to your party's playstyle and whether they can separate character-player knowledge or not.

>>49181136

Steal anything. I mean its not like you are going to present this to the world and be in danger of copyright. If a moment happens that requires improv, think of a plotline from a TV show, a movie, comic, anime, book, etc and apply it maybe with your own variant interpretation.

Also as for rules, use it as a guideline than an absolute word of God. Find a middleground between bending the rules and follwing it. Cause if you follow it and abide by it too much, your adventure might end up being too by the book and sometimes boring if you say your table can't do that cause its RAW. At the same time, be loose with rules and your party might think they can do anything and not feel any sense of player urgency and danger to the adventure you made and take it for granted. Ultimately, use the immortal "Yes, but..." tactic when a conflict of interest happens. Find that compromise.

And turn combat more narratively than treating it like a turn based CRPG unless you guys are running minis.

File: You+always+post+these+while+i+m+away+from+my+laptop+_6633b325d72bcf51442bed4a2a54502a.jpg (49KB, 388x290px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 388x290px

>>49175576
>>49175576
Really want to make a rapist druid.
A young gnome who was part of an expedition to some ruins with her family, who was polymorphed into a beast due to a curse.
In springtime.
After a month lost in the woods, she comes across a shire to a nature goddess and begs for salvation, and the goddess answers.
She would be super sweet, love people and technology (rock gnome) and whenever she transformed (moon druid) she would become the biggest, nastiest alpha male animal of whatever she chose to become, and would constantly seek out new animals species to fuck, in a twisted attempt to deal with her trauma. Once she boned an animal (gender wouldn't matter, but she would always be male) she wouldn't touch that species ever again.
At first it would hilarious to have this super sweet sunshine gnome just SNARL out of no-where, and later on it would be fun to kind of ease her out of her issues and be willing to use female forms again, as well as accepting animals being animals, and just letting go of her hate and fear.
It isn't even my magical realm, just the idea of a druid animal rapist occurred to me one day and hit my funny bone, and the character just kind of happened. It sucks cause I'll never be able to play it (for obvious reasons) but man, would be fun.

>>49181209
>CRPG unless you guys are running minis.
i dont think thats gonna be a problem
part of me is praying that exposure will breed familiarity, and so that i can keep checks and things at the forefront of my mind.
i want things to be flexible but i also want those character stats to feel substantial, while at the same time letting my players be creative.

>>49181227
sounds pretty edgy
and i cant thing of a group of people who would all be down with "and then, while still morphed, she pinned down a stray rabbit and fucked it bloody"
s'just weird dude

>>49179496
>I get proficiency in singing, oratory and beatbox performance.
>You can't even take my spellcasting focus away now

>>49181323
>Beatbox some sick fireball beats at them

>>49181227
>le wacky female rapist gnome
Literally die desu

>>49180284
Sages have nothing to do with shapeshifting or nature. They're arcane divination users, if anything

>>49181330
Spit hot fiyah

>>49180311
Wildshape goes up to CR1 for Land Druids, and CR6 for Moon Druids

>>49181338
Hot fire. I spit that.

>>49181284
Yeah, I can see how that would be how people would think it would go. It my mind it was more like
>bunch of tough folks round a fire inna woods
>Little gnome jerks up, focuses on something in the trees, snarls
>"I'll be right... back..."
>Uh okay
>gnome vanishes in the trees, moments later lots of yowling and rustling
>gnome comes back to the fire a after a couple minutes of this, hair messed up, leaves and twigs everywhere, super smug
>raised eyebrows all around

Like I said, it would never work... but oh man, if it could lol
I think the key would be keeping it fairly low-key, and playing up the "druid that loves technology" angle more then the "animal rapist" side of things.

>>49180612
That's obviously not what he asked for you fuckwit

>>49181267

Just keep them in check. When they describe their actions, reel them in telling them they have to pass the DC checks so they can know their limits but at the same time don't discourage them to be creative. If the Wizard wants to use his Mage Hand to act as a platform for the agile Rogue to jump on so he can reach the the other side of the ravine, I say let them but compromise that since Mage Hand only carries no more than 10lbs. the Wizard might need a very good roll (STR) to hold the weight while the Rogue has to do an Atheltics or Acrobatic check as wel. The very idea is rule breaking due to RAW factor but having your party turn DnD to a Mario platformer for that moment makes me fucking grin that I will allow it provided they make the rolls. At one point, they know limits and won't feel tey can het away with all the time but at the same time, the table is encouraged to think out of the box. Rule of Cool, yo. Of course keep it in moderation as usual.

>>49180302
I have a small experiment for you to try.

I want you to think of all the spiritual things that come to mind when you hear the word "monk"

You do that? Good. Now throw that out, but retain all the physical things a monk would have.

That is one way you could play an evil monk. Perhaps they disagreed with the Abbot of their temple and left. Perhaps they got kicked out of the temple for being too aggressive or failing to keep their emotions in check. Maybe they used to be a good monk, wandering the world, trying to make things better, but the world refused to change. Maybe one moment caused them to say to themselves, "fuck this shit" and started down the Path of Stannum

>>49181136
it all comes down to playstyle and/or DMing style. My players never know anything, neither the enemies' rolls, nor their DCs.

>>49181330
>>49181338
The verbal component is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1U0qvtQnE8&ab_channel=TheProdigy

I felt the need to homebrew something, so I came up with a new warlock patron: a sufficiently powerful vampire. Can I get someone to take a look at it and get some opinions?

http://pastebin.com/5NT4MJgg

>>49180302
Watch some wuxia, they tend to have evil martial artists as antagonists.
If you want them as protagonists (and to laugh some) watch Evil Cult.

>>49180518
Considering in wuxia stuff Manichean invaders tend to have pretty powerful martial arts, that religion part works really well.

File: Man I'm pretty.png (62KB, 339x400px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 339x400px

>>49181411
>Ability to inflict Stunned at 1st level
Whoa Mama

>>49181495
You just made me go look up when monks get stunning strike. I had no idea it took that fucking long. That's probably going to see a change.

>>49181514
I mean, It's a super flavorful ability, and it does absolutely zip on a passed save. I would honestly just swap it and the 6th level feature, and reduce the duration of mist form to the beginning, not end, of your next turn.

>>49181411
Isn't that covered by Undying?

>>49181544
I wasn't going to scrap the idea, just change it. It's meant to be your opponent cowering in fear rather than completely incapacited, but stunned was the closest condition to what I had in mind.. Maybe let them use it twice per short rest, and rather than stunned justhave it reduce all their speeds to zero for a round?

>>49181453
>Considering in wuxia stuff Manichean invaders tend to have pretty powerful martial arts, that religion part works really well.

What was odd to me is that Bane, canonically a deity of order (of the tyrannical sort) and discipline (of the "fuck your freedoms" sort) and possessing many warlike aspects to his faith has NEVER had a Monk order in FR.
So I created this almost totally silent and hyper-disciplined monk guy who served The Black Hand as what amounted to a human weapon; he didn't even have a real name, because names are for those with freedom and he was not free, instead living as a fist in the service of Bane. It took awhile for the players to realize that "Fist" was not in fact his name but his job description; The Fist of Bane.

>>49181554
Embarassingly, I didn't know that patron existed. It does specifically mention vampires, but doesn't seem like the powers are really vampire-themed. It would depend on if you wanted a general (anti-)undead theme, or specifically the servant of a vampire I guess. It's not like more options is a bad thing, unless some of those options are traps.

UA today?

>>49181562
I'd still argue in favor of leaving it as is and just swapping the 1st and 6th level features. Provides some extra survivability early on, and gives a really good control ability to the warlock once they hit 6th.

I'm new to dnd in general, but I want to make something clear.
How do Hunter's Mark and Hail of Thorns interact?
For example if Hunter's Mark is on the target, then I cast Hail of Thorns, will Hunter's Mark disappear off my target because both require concentration?
If Hunter's Mark falls of because I cast another spell requiring concentration or because I failed a CON save on being attacked, I can't use a bonus action to put Hunter's Mark back on a target without using up a spell slot right?

>>49181614
Yeah that's fair enough.
Best of luck!

>>49181693
Yeah only 1 works unfortunately. Just one of the many reasons why Ranger is the worst class.

File: Legolas_-_in_Two_Towers.png (318KB, 636x426px) Image search: [Google]

318KB, 636x426px

>>49181720
That fucking blows.
It pretty much makes Hail of Thorns only work as an opener.
I'd give up on Hail of Thorns, what are some good level 1 spells for Hunter Ranger? Would Jump help me in encounters by giving me easier access to high ground?

Can a Wood Elf Deep Stalker use bonus action hide if they meet the requirements for Mask of the Wild or whatever it's called? (The hide in natural phenomena one)

Are there stats for castle walls?

>>49181323
I am currently playing a bard who has proficiency in rapping, I enjoy it immensely(also don't need a focus)

Old GM though relativly new to D&D 5e, and I was wondering for a potential future campaign, how would one run mobs of enemies as npc stat blocks in this system? My first idea is to do something similar to other systems and have it as one named NPC with the combined HP of all the members, and possibly some bonuses to attack and such based on the quantity.

I wanna be able to have a dozen skellingtons attack my players without having to run a dozen initiative slots.

>>49181833
Check either the DMG or the Variant Rules UA (or maybe I'm misremembering and there's a UA that's just mass combat)

>>49181858
Oh yea, duh, there's a section in the DMG, thanks for pointing that out.

File: hate.jpg (28KB, 473x181px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 473x181px

Just clarifying something about the way Aura of Hate from the Oathbreaker Paladin works.

It says it gives the bonus to ANY fiends and undead inside the aura.
The way I read that, that means that even fiends and undead hostile to the Paladin gain this bonus?
Usually it specifies 'creatures you choose' or 'friendly creatures', so I think I'm correct in my assumption but I just wanted to double check with others.

>>49181747
I don't know about everyone else but I think Jump is one of the funnest level 1 spells. Hunters Mark is basically the only thing worth concentration but some Ranged Attack Spells at higher levels don't need Concentration I think.

>>49181767
Yes

>>49181927
Beccause it is made with a BBEG in mind it most likely means all but I would rule you can choose otherwise it is really shit in a lot of situations.

Did any of ya'll go to the Acquisitions Inc. showing and get the adventure from it?

>>49175576

I've been reading Xianxia novels lately so I made up a druid to act out like the typical character in that genre.

>>49181984
I did.

>>49182030
Was it worth it? Also, does the adventure look like it's any good?

>>49181720
>>49181747
Let's fix the Ranger!™
Hunter's Mark is no longer a spell, but an ability, available to Rangers at 1st level, while Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer are a single feature.
The Hunter's Mark ability allows the use of Hunter's Mark, as the spell, a number of times equal to your Wisdom modifier. You regain any expended uses when you finish a long rest.
Alternatively, when you cast Hunter's Mark, you can reduce its duration to 1 minute. If you cast Hunter's Mark with the reduced duration, it doesn't require concentration, and when the target dies, you cannot mark a new creature with the same use of Hunter's Mark if the current marked target dies.

File: UA When Armies Clash.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>49181833
Here you go. The UA referenced by >>49181858

>>49181927
Yes, it means friend or foe alike, because the Oathbreaker isn't specifically made for players, more as a tool for DMs

>>49182037
Egh. I mean it was nice to get a freebie adventure and that they had some pre-roll before the show, but ultimately you're still just paying to see something that's also live streamed for free at the same time. That said, I still had fun and would probably do it again, but I particularly enjoy Acquisitions Inc., so I doubt the feeling would be the same for anyone with little more than a passing interest in it.

Adventure is pretty decent. Starts out with you and your group being recruited by an intern at AI who is looking for new interns to go talk to a giant who is willing to see if he should back out of his father's plans and go against him; his father being Count Stratovan (the guy getting the Rod of Seven Parts together from the AI games). So after they beat up some thugs in an ambush as a way of proving they're competent enough to help AI out, the intern gives them instructions that the guy and his assistant want you to sneak in through his castle to meet up with him, because all other giants and servants of his are hell-bent on war. The intern also gives the party Intructor Tulahk, a talking skull (that can fly, but prefers to be held by the players), whose main purpose is to give tips when the party is really confused on what to do, to mock them or make jokes, and to grade the players and see what level of intern the players should be given when the adventure is over (ranking from Sub-Intern, Intern, Grand Intern, to Sub-Employee).

(1/2)

>>49182298
(2/2)

The party flies up on griffons and then explores the castle as they see fit, making their way to the audience chamber to meet with the son and his assistant. On the way they can do certain things like see various evidence that the son is truthful in that he seems willing to turn on his father in an effort of greater peace while the assistant is really trying to turn the son into working with the father or they can also do things that can more easily anger the son and make it especially harder to bargain with him (desecrating his mother's sarcophagus breaking into certain areas, stealing his stuff, killing his grandfather) which he could feel happening because it's his castle and MAGIC. But regardless, you talk to him and regardless of how it goes, his assistant turns on him and starts to choke him out with a magic necklace he gave to him, and then the party has 5 rounds to disable the necklace or kill the assistant. The assistant will also call in a young white dragon for help, but because the assistant abused it in the past, you can potentially persuade it to help you. After defeating the assistant and either scaring off the dragon by beating it up or having it help the party, assuming the party also saved the son, then he thanks them, gives them some treasure, agrees to help AI in fighting back against the giants by meeting with them and convincing them to your side, and if the party took objects, he says they can keep them since they were trophies of his father anyways.

Success also means players get to be interns (based on their rank), and Grand Interns get plain grey robes, valued at 1sp, and a coupon for 50% off deluxe versions of the robes for 200gp total, but valued at 100gp. Sub-Employees get to meet and get congratulated by Omin, Binwin, Jim, and Viari.

File: bailey-cleric.jpg (173KB, 740x1080px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 740x1080px

How would /5eg/ fix Trickery clerics?
Would giving them martial weapon proficiency be enough? How about making their divine strike additional weapon damage, like sneak attack?

>>49182585
There's nothing *to* fix, they works just fine. It's not like a beast master or bladelock where the mechanics are actually counter intuitive to the theme of the subclass. They're still goddamn clerics, the 3rd best class in the system.

How come there aren't rules for when a warlock disobeys their patron or a cleric refusing their God? Have you ever seen this happen in a campaign?

>>49182585
At like, 7th level, the Channel Divinity clone deals a small amount of psychic damage when it attacks.

Give them Phantasmal Force at 3rd level, and Major Image at 5th.

Keep Divine Strike as poison, but allow your duplicate to apply it.

Use any or all of these.

>>49182627
Because the Warlock's patron can't take their abilities away from them, unlike a Cleric or Paladin's deity.
They can, however, send some of their other minions after a really disobedient Warlock, but it's up to the DMs discretion

>>49181573
I don't know much about FR, honestly but that sounds pretty cool to me.
Also, I was under the impression, monks in general aren't common in FR, being all "oriental" and shit

>>49182627
>>49182646
Oh, didn't notice the cleric stuff too. The cleric, in older editions, lost access to all class abilities.
In my group, we rule that the cleric loses channel divinity and can't prepare any spells. Domain spells are left intact, and they still got the spells they prepared beforehand though

>>49182627
Probably because what happens is far too varied to really give rules, it's not as cut and dry as a Paladin breaking his oath.

Like, disobeying your Fiend patron will have completely different results to disobeying your Fey patron. They can't take the powers away, but their response would be different. A fiend might send some dudes to fuck with him, a benevolent Fey might just be disappointed but not really do much, or a less benevolent one might react badly.

As for clerics, it would work similarly to a Paladin I think, but with no concrete 'fall'. If they continue to displease their God repeatedly, maybe there'd be an (increasing if you continue to fuck up) chance whenever they cast a non-domain spell that it just wouldn't work due to losing favor.

>>49182624
Yeah, I do know the trickery domain isn't as subpar as the Beastmaster, for example, but it's still the worst domain by far.
Being the only weapon-oriented domain, getting divine strike but not martial weapons, really hurts them. Their divine strike damage type is also the worst damage type in the game

>>49182646
>Paladins
>Being beholden to a deity

That's not how it works now, brahj.

>>49182075
Yup, Hunter's Mark should've been a class feature to begin with. But why make it limited?

>>49182585
>fix Trickery Clerics
Why?
>Would giving them martial weapon proficiency be enough?
I don't think you understand what "trickery" is.
>How about making their divine strike additional weapon damage, like sneak attack?
Seriously, read a definition of "trickery." ow is giving more direct damage congruent with bastardry?

>>49182683
Because it's stronger than the Cleric's War Priest, Wrath of the Storm or Warding Flare, which are limited by your WIS mod.
An at-will 1st level spell from 1st level is too powerful

>>49182691
Then explain why a Cleric domain which gets divine strike doesn't get even a fucking shortsword, like a monk does. You're stuck using a greatclub for GWM, or a dagger for finesse as your best weapon choices.

>>49182674
DM>RAW
If a player wants to be a LG Paladin devoted to a God, he better be fucking ready to respect that oath

>>49182721
Okay, that's fine, you're free to do whatever you like at your table, but the way you were phrasing it made it sound like you were making assumptions based on previous editions and not reading the book.

You're free to ignore the book as long as you've actually read it. Carry on, friend.

>>49182585
How about making their divine strike actually function like sneak attack, requiring advantage or an ally, and increasing damage to compensate? +2d8 going up to +4d8 instead of 1d8 to 2d8. I think that would make them a pretty interesting choice with a different playstyle to the other martial cleric domains.

>>49182696
FFS, it's just a bit of not guaranteed damage each round, not unlike Sneak Attack. And Ranger sucks enough already

>>49182740
This could work too, but then they'd have to use a finesse or ranged weapon too. Meaning they have to use a dagger, unless they get scimitar, shortsword or rapier proficiency elsewhere.
That's why I think the only boost to the subclass really needed is martial weapon proficiency. The Trickery domain is already the only subclass that only gets a usable ability at 1st level, while every other domain gets free cantrips/proficiencies AND a usable ability.
It's like they forgot to add a paragraph in the PHB

>>49182764
Well they already get that with either Colossus Slayer, Giant Killer or Horde Breaker. I don't think they need 2 different at-will damage boosts.
I'm excluding the Beastmaster here, of course, because I'm waiting for October and Mearls' Ranger 2.0(tm)

CoS question. The card reading my players got for the encounter with Strahd is him in k60, North Tower Peak.

My problem is what's stopping Strahd simply descending 50 feet to deal with the characters who will inevitably attack the Heart of Sorrow? His motivation would be to keep the Heart alive. Having him descend would make the final encounter quite difficult as strahd could just throw people off the stairs. However there's really not much in the tower peak besides the crown and card reading. Why would he stay?

>>49182878
Theres no reason he wouldn't. The card reading just says 'if the players go here, Strahd is here.'

He doesn't just stay there and wait.
Hell, one of the random encounters is Strahd.

>>49178060

My instrument is the musical notes produced by my minor illusion cantrip.
Check mate, meatshield

>>49183197
So, you take at least two actions to cast a spell?

>>49175483
hello anyone has some homebrew feats?

>>49183356
There's literally a link for a homebrew compendium in the OP

>>49183427
thanks for the passive agressiveness and thanks for the info as well.

>>49183448
You asked the question quoting the post that has the stuff you're looking for in it.

It's like walking into a bakery and asking if anyone knows where to get bread

>>49183543
still, it's always appreciated how angry everyone always is on 4chan , sorry if i have infuriated you.

>>49183573
Of course we're fucking angry when people come and ask stupid questions without reading through even then first post in a thread

>>49183573
He didn't even respond angrily. He just told you where the link was.

Any news on an Unearthed Arcana this month?

>>49181323
One of the first memorable moments from a game my old players still talk about was when an enemy bard started beatboxing to use inspire courage on his allies. They needed a few minutes to recover from laughing.

Is anyone looking for players for a Saturday game? I'm looking to pop my 5e cherry and I'd rather it be with one of you guys.

>>49182585
I try not to "fix" things on the game system level if I don't have to. Older editions of D&D had favored weapons associated with gods, so I imported that idea into 5e as a class of magical items.

I had a player once in 5e who played a life cleric of Arawai. Arawai's favored weapon in 3.5 was a morning star, so I created a magical morningstar created by devotees of Arawai to give to her worshippers for exemplary service in upholding her ideals. It appeared to be made from wood and vines, and it granted an attuned user the Thorn Whip cantrip and a single casting of Goodberry once per day. A cleric of Arawai who attuned to it would be proficient in its use, regardless of their normal weapon proficiencies.

If I were to do the same thing for a Trickery cleric, I'd pick the favored weapon of a Trickery god and do something like allow an attuned user to cast Minor Illusion and have the weapon deal an extra 1d8 of damage if you have advantage to attack the target or an ally is within 5 ft. and not incapacitated.

>>49183655
Do you really expect them to publish something on a US holiday when most businesses are closed?

>>49184052
>Most businesses
I think you mean banks and schools, anon. Half of the population is still working today.

But yeah there's no way in hell WotC is.

>>49184052
Shitty rushed .docx in three weeks confirmed

>>49184128
Well, it's not much work to upload a pdf now, innit.
I doubt Mearls types those up 10 minutes before they're supposed to be online

>>49184128
Any financial business is closed. Most non-federal government offices are closed. You can bet that any business that doesn't rely on a constant churn of faceless one-time customers isn't open today in the US.

>>49184146
I'm convinced he doesn't finish them until 10 minutes before releasing them based on the huge fluctuation in quality.

>>49182075
Here's an idea I've been toying with:

When you make a succesful weapon attack against, make a wisdom (survival) check against the target's AC. [with advantage for favored enemies, of course.]
Upon succeding, the enemy becomes 'marked', and takes an extra [level scaling damage. Maybe something like 1d4 every few levels or so] upon being directly hit with an attack [works with AoE's and single target, but not passive/reoccuring damage.]
This condition would probably give all of the other benefits of Hunter's Mark [tracking and whatnot] but could only be applied to one enemy at a time. [maybe even make it impossible to change within a certain time limit, or something]

I like it because it gives wisdom a more combat purpose, further blurring melee-casting lines (important ranger aspect, imho), it doesn't eat concentration, which severly hampers all of the rangers spell casting, and it gives favored enemies a purpose from day 1.
I don't think it needs a bonus action to use, but maybe it should be required.

Thoughts?

>>49179453

Man, Old One Warlocks are the worst. Always with the flipping tentacles..

>>49184270
I'd make it eat up a bonus action, and also make that you can make another survival check anytime you hit an enemy to transfer the mark. Also, it could scale the same way cantrips do, at 5th, 11th and 17th, for a total of 4d4 free damage per attack at 17th level and higher, in addition to working with swift quiver, for massive burst damage. I like it.
I wouldn't make it so AoE triggers the bonus damage though, I'd prefer it only be weapon attacks like the ordinary Hunter's Mark

>>49184313
Well, at least there's no more at-will Black Tentacles which deal 3d6+4 damage per turn

>>49179453

>Implying a demonic buttplug is a bad thing

Warlocks always struck me as the types who were into freaky sex stuff anyway.

>>49184417
My Flind Warlock can neither deny or confirm that

>>49184389
Fair enough about the AoE's, and I like the scaling. Should there be a delay on mark damage? I don't like the idea of it being used every turn on a different enemy, instead if focusing on one at a time. Does the bonus action cost prevent this already?
Also, it should probably replace/be enhanced by collosus slayer for hunters, and be available to animals for BM's.

Also, I think it opens up the capstone for some inprovement, but I won't get into that now.

>>49182721

Keep in mind that is on the level of the God of War removing a fighter's class abilities for showing cowardice, or the God of Magic removing a wizard's spellcasting for acting stupid.

>>49184477
well, you have to attack, then use your bonus action to make the check and apply the mark. Then you can make another attack this round and apply the bonus damage. Next round, you can make two attacks with your action, both of which can apply the bonus damage, and if you spend your 2nd round getting swift quiver up, from the third round onwards your'll be getting a total bonus of 20d4/round, assuming you hit with all attacks.
It's quite a lot, and that damage is exactly why i was considering making it wisdom times per long rest, as stated in my first post
But to answer your question, no, I don't think there should be a delay between you using the ability and starting to deal bonus damage, and I also think it shouldn't interact with Hutner features in any way

>>49184551
On the same level, yes
Possible, no
For a Cleric it is possible to lose his class abilities by disobeying his god, and for a Paladin the same was true in past editions, and has only been changed now. Only thing my group did was change paladins back to how they were.
Meanwhile, Fighters and Wizards don't get their combat prowess or the aptitude for learning magic directly from a god, at least not in the same way a cleric and paladin get their divine powers from gods

File: 1417983225630.gif (2MB, 320x170px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x170px

>>49179405
>There are no more rules about a bard having to play an instrument

It's described exactly like that under spell casting ability and spell focus.
Unless you actually believe "using an instrument" to create music means holding, you're just trying to worm your way outta of the casting economy.

>>49179506
>Their magic doesn't just come from music, it also comes from their "wishes" and "oration" according to the PHB
Jesus Christ, scumbag casters want us to believe bards are powered by wish spells.

>Spellcasting
>You have learned to untangle and reshape the fabric of reality in harmony with your wishes AND music
>Spellcasting Ability
>Charisma is your spellcasting ability for your bard spells. Your magic comes from the heart and soul you pour into the performance of your music or oration.

Bards cast magic through a musical performance, period. Just be grateful the DM doesn't make you roleplay it. Bards are one of the few casters better off with a spell pouch, specifically if they want to use ranged weapons and shields.

>>49175611

There are some sub-reddits for homebrews where I've seen a shaman class with discussions that should help determine if they are decent and worth trying..

/r/UnearthedArcana

/r/boh5e

>>49184595
The stuff on /r/boh5e generally seems better, but that mostly has to do with their grading system. Stuff on the UA subreddit is mostly usable, but requires some reading through first

>>49177786
Adobe Acrobat Pro

How do I stay competitive and useful as a light cleric? Others members of the party are crown paladin, champion fighter, storm sorcerer and open hand monk. I'm basically 90% sure that I won't be getting magic items, because the DM in question loves his magic swords and wizard staffs, but not really anything else.

>>49184704
You don't need anything really, you're a blaster cleric. What race are you?

>>49184704
Ask for a wand of fireballs.

>>49184584
The bard character description block gives the example of hitting a sword on your armor to keep tempo so basically fuck off autist
There is 0 reason, raw or rai, that bards should be hamstrung by some arbitrary limit no other caster follows

>>49184749
Human, as is everyone else except for the fighter, he's a half orc.

>>49184821
Variant i presume? what feat did you get if so?

File: 1466451617966.jpg (408KB, 850x1133px) Image search: [Google]

408KB, 850x1133px

>>49184584
>It's described exactly like that
Where? Show us. Get your book and give us the passage where it says they need to be playing an instrument to use it as a focus. Are you misinterpreting "You can use a musical instrument as a spellcasting focus." as "You can use a musical instrument and have it function as a spellcasting focus."?

>The entire second half of that post
Holy shit. Because music is only instruments, ever. Especially for somantic components, or verbal components- which RAW require you to speak, not deepthroat a mouthpiece.

Be grateful your DM doesn't make you roleplay lifting a fridge as a fighter, or picking a lock as a rogue, or god forbid learning to read as a wizard. Unless you're currently acting under their instruction to roleplay a faggot. This isn't about your houserules nerfing bards, it's about the book RAW and RAI.

>>49182624

What are the 1st and 2nd?

>>49184830
Well, so far it's arcane initiate for mage armor, prestidigitation and control flames. A suboptimal choice, I know, but if I won't be able to talk my DM into giving me an unarmored variant of the class, I'll have to compromise power for flavor.
If I won't have to, however, I'll likely pick up either warcaster or resilient (constitution), not sure which.

>>49184875
as a life cleric, which gets heavy armor, you should've gotten chainmail, a shield, a warhammer or something similar, and warcaster. you don't need anything else, with that you're golden

File: qXYRJhI9AY_9_R-SNJf3FhKB5W5A-CTQFzPwRJehnNE.jpg (125KB, 576x768px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 576x768px

Anyone have this?

>>49182024
Obsessed with gainz, revengence and ignoring his wife?

>>49184990
I wanted to go, but nearest theater was 4 hours away, and I couldn't get away to it. I'd love a copy.

File: 1444367066463-1.png (1MB, 479x720px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 479x720px

This is about spell focuses you dunces. If you want to be a baby about it, just use a fanny pack for M spells. Try reading and following the conversation next time, girls.

>>49184853
It's implied by how bards cast spells, unless you actual believe the bard just points his lute around like a magic wand.

>Holy shit. Because music is only instruments, ever
If you want to use the bard focus, yes.

>>49184808
>fluffy italicized stories are rules
You can totally do it though, just not with M spells and a focus.

How would you arbitrate these combat strategies?

I run forward, grab my opponent's head and shove my thumbs into his
eyes.

I run forward, and grab my opponent in a bear hug, squishing his arms
to his sides and choke him to death.

I slam my opponent's head into the wall (hopefully stunning him) and
then next turn I grab him and pull him to the ground.

>>49185443
1+2. Grapple, then on the next turn, if grapple is maintained, deal STR bludgeoning damage.

3. Grapple, then throw at end of turn. Allow Athletics check to throw hard. Probably wouldn't stun, however (unless you're a Battlemaster, then I might let you make a maneuver that does that). Throwing to the ground is a Shove attempt.

>>49185443

I'd explain to you that you only get to choose your actions and can't determine the results.

>>49181693
No if you lose concentration you don't get the spell back. Technically how it works is when you cast it expend the spell slot, no matter what it's gone from there.

If you get hit and fail the concentration check then it's gone. If you cast another spell that requires concentration it's gone.

>>49185502
How in hell 1 and 3 (first half, at least) aren't actions?

>>49185536
It's like saying 'I get my sword and stab the enemy in the brain to kill it instantly'

>>49185567
You do realize that thumbing the eyes doesn't actually kill, right? It's temporary blindness at best. Maybe permanent if you never clip your nails.
And smashing enemy's head into the wall is hardly all that different from hitting his head with a mace. In fact, likely less dangerous.

>>49185487
So objectively worse then just full attacking in every way. Shit sucks, man.

File: winnie-the-poo-copy.png (186KB, 394x392px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 394x392px

OK guys I need a bit of help.

One of my players is a Warlock who made a pact with Asmodeus.
The latter wants the former to corrupt a blessed, underground Pool of Clarity that's being cared for by a rogue Kuo Toa (or a rogue Myconid, I'm not sure yet).

I need your best ideas for two things:
1) How could he corrupt the pool? What do I need to make available to him in order to corrupt it?
2) What would Asmodeus do if the PC decides not to obey?

I was thinking of Asmodeus triggering some kind of Wild Magic effect on the PC's next spell, but there's probably a better idea out there.

Thanks!

>>49185536
>>49185567
Agreeing with this anon, limiting what your character can just say he does keeps the game fair. If I wanted to homebrew to throw in maneuvers such as this for martials to add realism you better believe that Firebolt is gonna melt metal and burn your skin off.

TL;DR: You roll attacks and damage you don't say what happens. The DM decides what happens. If you got a problem you DM.

>>49185443
Are you a monk?
If yes, then:
1) Opponent tries a Dexterity save, if fails, he's blinded for (Your STR) turns
2) Grab attempt. On subsequent turns you can roll an opposed Strength check and deal unarmed damage. Actually, less effective than you normal attacks.
3) Just some fluff for an unarmed attack

If you're not a monk, just deal some unarmed damage

>>49185443
You must grapple them first, opposedgrapple check. You can make the attack as one of the attacks of an attack action, dealing unarmed strike damage + strmod (though I'd still let a monk use dex to-hit, but if it was dex to-damage as well then it'd be kind of overpowered without a specific 'blinding strike' ability) and potentially blinding them for a bit, or permanently on a crit.

Choking someone is less effective than holding them for your friends to kill them. They'll be dead by sword before you choke hem to death. Opposed grapple check first, athletics vs acro/athl as usual. Then..
If you're doing something like that, I imagine it'd look something like 'restrained', and you might need the feat to restrain both you and them.

Opposed grapple check as an attack. Then, shove as an attack. The enemy might make a con save not to be stunned, varying depending on how they are. Next turn there may be more grapple checks if you don't autosucceed.


I think the best way these things would work is if you had to spend inspiration to attempt them.
This would stop people constantly using on-the-spot homebrewed attacks that might not actually be very combat-fair, but will allow them to use those manoeuvures as often as they get inspiration for whatever reason.
I'd then have to say people can stack more than one inspiration, and...
I don't want to have to tell someone, 'You can't do [thing that makes sense] because you don't have inspiration.'

>>49185680
You know, people keep defending "I attack" playstyle Martials are subject to with "Oh, but you can describe your actions. It's somehow not as boring that way"
And here you say that I can't even describe my actions, just roll the dice and nod at GM given words?
Fuck that

>>49185673
Asmodeus could offer the warlock an extra-powerful spell he could use while near that pool, perhaps communicating through a familiar or tome or something.

If the party has to fight near that pool, the warlock will be SERIOUSLY tempted to use the really nice spell.
And it will be a really nice spell. Maybe the warlock will be getting a temporary slot increase or something.
But the warlock will struggle to contain the power, and part of the spells are there to corrupt the pool - perhaps even open a gateway to more demons. Perhaps even kill the Kuo Toa.

Don't do something like 'Asmodeus mind controls you, he makes you do bad things.'
That's not really how a warlock should be.

Try to aim for some sort of offer. An offer the warlock CAN refuse, but is tempted heavily not to do.

Perhaps if a party member goes down, he could offer to restore them to full health and then some in the pool.

If the warlock doesn't do it? Up the stakes.
If they STILL don't accept? Either give a very mild punishment (say, disadvantage on fiend expanded spells, loss of temporary hp from fiend's bonus) and give up, and asmodeus can try to find some other way.

Don't force it on your player. Make it a thing where they had the choice, and they'll now suffer the consequences, good and bad.

>>49185673
The pool, once corrupt, only shows what asmodeus wants the person interacting with the pool to see
Asmodeus will first try to motivate the PC by offering some reward in exchange.
if the PC doesn't obey even then, asmodeus motivates the PC by sending something after them. He can't directly influence the Character's spellcasting, because the player is not a cleric who gains spells from asmodeus.
The powers asmodeus granted to the warlock cannot be taken back. Maybe if he personally came to do it, but that'd mean the end of your setting

>>49185673
Tell him to cast a spell not a cantrip while standing in the water. That will deepen the connection with his patron and the patron will corrupt the water.

If he disobeys then without telling the warlock when he uses dark ones own luck he takes psychic damage for the roll. And warns him.

>create an adventure purely on rolling tables from the DMG and using some homebrew tables on the web to fill in the blanks the book doesnt cover
>got 3 adventures ready for next session

this is addicting

>>49185775
>Asmodeus could offer the warlock an extra-powerful spell he could use while near that pool, perhaps communicating through a familiar or tome or something.
And a bladelock might simply slay someone with the pact weapon while standing in the water

Is there a limit on the level of a spell cast from a magic item through charges rather than directly through spell slots?

File: wOjUCZh.jpg (736KB, 950x1400px) Image search: [Google]

736KB, 950x1400px

>>49185771
You'd have to sit with the DM to homebrew rules beforehand to keep the game fair.

The danger is that you then do this ALL THE TIME, which could become broken.

A game such as Dark Heresy has rules or hitting each body part, and you can take an accuracy penalty in an attempt to hit a certain body part.

5e does not have such rules. If you said 'I want to aim to cut off their head' then you've descended into a well of confusion.
The easiest choice in this case is that the DM has you decapitate the enemy if you bring them to 0 on a good enough hit, or otherwise you might hurt the enemy hitting their head/shoulders whatever.
Just a re-fluffed attack.

If the DM says, 'Well, enemy does a DC 10 dex save to not instantly fucking die' then it's not going to be awfully balanced, especially if you do it all the time.

Usually the idea for martials to do other things is with magical items or ordinary items, perhaps using items in creative ways that are less exploitable and more situation-specific such as trying to coat your sword in alchemist's fire so you can get a better edge on a yeti.

Constantly using attacks that aren't agreed upon will delay combat as your DM tries to work out what the fuck is going on.


In short: Ask your DM about specific things you can do before the game.

File: 1450141815315.gif (328KB, 1000x773px) Image search: [Google]

328KB, 1000x773px

>>49185341
>Claims fluff isn't rules when italicized
>Cites fluff as rules when it is contradicted by the actual parts of the book that discuss how a mechanic works
I'm done. I can't believe I've been baited for this long.

>>49185771
You can describe how you hit with a blade or punch them, but giving them conditions like blinded stunned or prone is completely different. Those conditions are deadly to whoever gets them.

Being able to throw a condition on with a regular attack with no resources used would mean you could do that every attack.

>>49185891
>>49185771
Oh, right, let me update that 'In short' section:


Going to do it all the time? Ask your DM to homebrew rules about it. They have every right to refuse, but it would make martials more interesting.
Going to do it as a one-off, situational? Your DM should try to allow it if they can on accounts of creativity and making combat more dynamic. They'll probably stop you if you start abusing it, though.

How are roll20 groups for 5e?

File: Chaotic Evil Stupid at its finest.jpg (64KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 1280x720px

>look at general
>arguments about instruments and spell focuses
>go to sleep
>wake up
>look at general
>arguments about instruments and spell focuses

Fuck this, I'm going to make a clown bard with a mech-suit that has a built in horn so they can honk while they walk and they can walk while they honk and they can make everybody rue the day they crossed that line.

>>49185891
Nothing in >>49185443 is an instakill. 2 is badly written, but not knowing what that anon meant I can only parse it as essentially a bear hug.
You're tilting at the wrong windmills

>>49185909
And that's why DM has the power to make rulings. Since I'm a Forever DM, I took a swing at those in >>49185689
I don't believe those outweigh normal attacks in any way

>>49185982
Some good, some bad, literally just like other social groups. Ok games are all over, great games are rare.

>>49185994
Just make your nose the honker

>>49185900
What rules would that be?

>>49185994
Lynch the fucking roboticist.

>>49185864
I believe no, so if you have a Wand of Magic Missles with 9 charges, you could use it and cast the equivalent of a ninth level spell. But I would house rule and say 9th is the highest level of spell you can throw.

>>49185998
No, but if the DM makes a spot decision that after grappling you can make a weapon attack that's basically like a normal weapon attack but has a significant chance of blinding..
If the player abuses that, that's bad.

It would directly upgrade their standard attack, even if it's situational that it can only be done while grappling.
Looking at monks in particular here, since it won't limit their unarmed strike damage at all, even though technically 'special attacks' require you to use your attack action and not your bonus martial arts attack.

The DM would then have to tell you 'you now can't do the thing you just did' to keep it fair, which would be a bit immersion-breaking that you can only try to blind someone once in every lifetime.

>>49186022
The rules on PHB 203, Material components and spellcasting focii.

>>49186077
In that post specifically, blinding was meant to be only just that. No damage, no grappling. Maybe even should've even added a roll to hit before the save. So a crapshoot, really.
And obviously won't work with any closed helmets.

Point being, while I agree that it can lead to abuse, DM isn't there to be a computer that follows what's written in the book word by word. He can make adjudicate and make decisions.
Neither are the players machines for rolling dice. Their imagination and will for action are literally the most important things in the game.
RPGs are games of collaboration and also they are social events. This makes it possible for DM and players to cooperate and find that balanced middle, that doesn't break the game and spices up the action.

And if either side is being a dick about it, they can go hang

>>49185849
Link to the online tables?

>>49185864
I seem to recall they're always cast at lowest level but I might be wrong

>>49185982
Too many people play AL like it's WoW
People make Bladesingers up to 5th level, then change
People farm HotDQ for loot
But there are plenty of good groups to be found

>>49185994
A warforged with a turntable on his chest

>>49186070
It's not possible to cast a spell higher than 9th level through any means known to man

>>49185661
Meh. Bear-hugging someone into death is actually really fucking hard. As is holding someone's sweaty head in your hands--while their hands are free to stab you--to try to push your thumbs into their eyes.

>>49186219
The DM can't always be expected to make on-the-spot fair decisions.

Alright, so they declare you can attack against their normal AC to blind them without damage or anything.
They declare the enemy makes a save throw against your strength/dexterity based DC.

The DM might not know it, but that's basically a free version of the level 2 spell 'blindness/deafness.'

The DM would have to refuse it, as unless they do something such as give the enemy advantage, you're basically getting a level 2 spell at-will. It may even be even stronger if it only takes one attack of your extra attack feat.

If the DM complies and allows you to do this, and you use it more than once or twice, they're skewing the game where people can emulate things they're not supposed to, and that other people in the party are supposed to fill the role of.

The exact point of the rules is to give a certain level of flexibility while still preventing stuff like exactly this from happening. To give DMs a reason why they can say 'No, you can't do that without the appropriate ability.'

And yes, the DM would be better if they did say 'Yes' instead, and came up with an immediate fair rule for it (Say, you can try to blind them as many times as you want without the appropriate ability, but you don't add your proficiency to your save DC and enemy has advantage.'

The DM isn't being a dick if they refuse it when they had no prior warning, however. They're just sub-par.

>>49185891

Hold up, is that new MonMun or fan-drawn?

>>49186351
>The DM can't always be expected to make on-the-spot fair decisions.
And that's why I said "find that balanced middle".
You can make a decision that isn't amazing in the long run. You can always come back and say to your players "You know, that was a bit too much. Let's tone it down a bit".
If they disagree and start going about thier hurt immersions, they're being unnecessarily disruptive. And that was what "being a dick" also referred to, not just our imaginary DM being an ass.

Basically, talking to people and being constructive is good

>>49186070
That was basically the situation I was thinking of. Thanks.

>>49186375
It's in here somewhere.
http://imgur.com/a/tPPkA
http://imgur.com/a/h91BP

>>49186445
I suppose.
I still think that if you intend to use it more than a couple of times as a situational thing, you should talk to the DM about it beforehand so they don't shoot you down / they're not too busy to think about it / they don't accidentally kill off the boss way too easily because the DM's too inexperienced to remember what all the status effects are.

It's more polite, anyway. Jumping radical things on the DM out of the blue while everybody's trying to move the fight along might be ever so slightly rude.
If the DM is fine with making a wild guess and then coming back to it later to decide 'No, that was overpowered' or 'Yes, but I need to make that less powerful' or 'Maybe it should have done damage, really' then it might work out, but I've had people complain before, fighting as if I was about to murder his last puppy when I decided that it'd be best if I changed the rules for something a little for the sake of game balance. Yes, that player was a dick.

>>49178516
If your hands use a two-handed weapon (i.e. EK) you want the bag so you can let go the weapon and use the components.

File: Class - Shaman (Michael Wolf) v1.4.1.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>49179041
I'll shill this forever, as I saw all the discussion, changes, playtest reports etc. in this thread as it was being made and refined. It's huge though, the main reason I don't like adding more whole classes to the game is that it requires learning so much, often entire sub-systems.

PSA to everyone not using a ring as a spellcasting focus: You are doing it wrong

>>49186639
>Not using a staff/rod with shillelagh and bashing the fuck outta cobbers who get in your way

>>49186639
Whoa, you can do that?
Does it have to be a magic ring?

>>49186639
Is that a house rule in your game then?

>>49186702
It doesn't have to be a magic item to be usable as a spellcasting focus
RAW, a wizard or sorcerer can use any shit they want as a focus. I mean, you can take a stick, call it a rod and now it's a focus.
>>49186710
I decided not to be stingy with focuses, although I still don't let the eldritch knight cast while dual wielding, simply because he's holding a weapon

Since taking out your spellcasting focus or manipulating a pouch is part of the spellcasting action, the ring is more fluff than a houserule

>>49186584
Well, then. Looks like we agree overall, just approach this situation from different angles
Good time of the day to you sir!

>>49175483
So, its the Giant bugaloo adventure book good?

>>49186868
Yesterday I finished The Great Upheaval, it was very fun, pretty deadly at the start though

>>49186868
Literally Ravenloft with giants

>>49186613
It's about time I scrutinize something.

It's a bit bland in that it's copying off of warlock, but you could easily say sorcerer is copying off of wizard somewhat, so I'll let it slide. Warlock is already pretty unique, so it's not a bad idea.
>spells, pretty much like warlock except level 5 and below spells are more flexible
>level 3 'pact' type feature. Pact of the blade rip-off or portent rip-off, which is better? Portent, obviously. Why would you not pick portent?

>ancestors level 6
You gain an additional way to use channel divinity, but no extra channel divinity uses. Huh?

>deny the untimely
One of few things that isn't ripped off of something else here, and is actually pretty neat. A little limited in use though as it only really works if your party has fled and you're now all alone, and thus the cleric couldn't revivify you.

>read thoughts
One of yet another few not-blatantly-stolen things. Actually decent looking.


I could go on and on like this, but the problem I have with this class is it's pretty much blatantly stealing features from other classes, without shame. When it doesn't steal features, it's good.
When it does steal features, it's boring enough that it's not worth going to the trouble of implementing in.

The class is weaker than warlock, except maybe at around level 3 where the shaman gets portent.

Overall though, the class design has been executed properly unlike most homebrew, and it would be great if it could make more new content.

>>49186613
If your new class requires an entire sub-system you have no idea of how 5e works.

This homebrew is terrible. 17 pages for one class is just 100% against the spirit of 5e design.

Shamans should just be a subclass of Druid. Fuck off.

>>49186814
It's elf-decapitating time, that's what it is.

>>49186345
Oh, joy, the 'reality only matters for martials' argument.

>>49186772
>I decided to fuck the one person that actually needs flexible rules for focuses
Great choice.

>>49180612
10/10 post

Help me /5eg/, I need a name for a singing sword, gives to a wizard as a gift from his students.
The sword's basically a level 3 bard, and he's annoying as hell. He's so annoying, in fact, that the wizard chained it in his dungeon

>>49182683
The reason it's a spell is so other classes can have access to it. See Bards and Vengance Paladins.

>>49187457
His placeholder name for now is William Shakeswordé. He dubbed himself that

>>49186868
Is there a scan?

>>49187464
Class features can grant access to spells

File: Fool.jpg (69KB, 671x399px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 671x399px

>>49187457

>>49187457
Andrew Lloyd Webber

>>49187510
>playing first 5e campaign
>everybody plays as some character from something, pretty casual game
>at some point, find a sword stuck in some stone
>the only character who manages to pull it out with a nat 20 is mine
>sorcerer, their focus, especially for things such as 'shocking grasp' is dolls

The poor guy.

>>49187457
>Help me /5eg/, I need a name for a singing sword, gives to a wizard as a gift from his students.

Mirabel.

>>49187457
Oh, given, not gives, i'm illiterate
>>49187661
Sword's a guy

>>49185771
You can attack and you can describe the attempt to do something with the attack but you can't fucking dictate that you succeeded in the attempt. The only time I let players do that is if they roll the attack blow that does kill the monster then they can wax fucking poetic all they want.

Is there a list somewhere of what spells can be cast as rituals?

>>49187683
>Sword's a guy

>Implying a guy sword can't have a girl name

>>49187715
https://donjon.bin.sh/5e/spells/
Rituals->yes

>>49187683
>>49187661
It would work as an elven guy's name.

File: 1458479925750.jpg (322KB, 1280x1283px) Image search: [Google]

322KB, 1280x1283px

I need to know everything there is worth knowing about the Church of the Silver Flame, I've been tasked with making a level 10 Paladin of the Church and I need to know just what exactly his responsibilities might entail.

>>49187238

That's whom the feat War Caster is there for.

>>49187818
Read the eberron wiki page you lazy fuck

>>49187818
Your best bet is the 3.5e Eberron Campaign Setting and Eberron Player's Guide. You can find them in here: https://mega.nz/#F!VkgGlSzK!11kU_hPmZpCqYBx8uRaHhA

>>49187818
The Silver Flame is all about fighting supernatural evil. You are the only thing standing between mortals and the things that go bump in the night. There are no higher powers to help out mortals, it's just you and the powers the Silver Flame has granted you.

>>49187841
The Eberron wiki page sucks and has contradictory information. Don't use that as a reference.

>>49187457

Give it an absurdly epic name. Like Cutting Requiem, or Ragnarok Fortuna.
And then the dissonance between the unweildiness and unpleasentry is the source of humor

>>49187832
And what EKs can afford better than most!

>>49187858
>Your best bet is the 3.5e Eberron Campaign Setting and Eberron Player's Guide. You can find them in here: https://mega.nz/#F!VkgGlSzK!11kU_hPmZpCqYBx8uRaHhA

Thanks anon! I've got "Faiths of Eberron" downloading right now, will read that when it's done.

>>49187884
>The Silver Flame is all about fighting supernatural evil. You are the only thing standing between mortals and the things that go bump in the night. There are no higher powers to help out mortals, it's just you and the powers the Silver Flame has granted you.

Sounds wicked, so he's basically a divinely-powered monster hunter? I can roll with that.

>>49187894
I was thinking of something punny, as my players seem to enjoy that. As I said, William Shakesworde is my placeholder for now

>>49187950
>Thanks anon! I've got "Faiths of Eberron" downloading right now, will read that when it's done.
That's the one source you shouldn't use. Keith Baker said it's completely wrong about the Silver Flame. Use the Eberron Campaign Setting and the Eberron Player's Guide.

>>49184551
I don't really buy that. In some settings the clerics power litterally comes from their diety.

File: KeithbakerCROP.jpg (66KB, 697x728px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 697x728px

>>49187969
>Keith Baker

Keith Baker looks like he'd make you sit through his crappy magic show before he'd answer any questions.

>>49188044
He's the dude who wrote the setting, so I believe him when he says the writers of Faiths of Eberron fucked something up, since his name isn't on that book. What FoE says about the Silver Flame doesn't really line up with what the other sources say about it.

>>49187687
Again, nowhere in the original post it was dictated that the attack succeeded

>>49187969
Keith Baker and Richard Baker are different guys

>>49188163
Richard Baker's name isn't on either the ECS or FoE. Wut?

>>49188204
FFS... I mixed up Richard Baker (WotC rules guy during 3E in 4E), Keith Baker (Eberron guy) and Vincent Baker (lotsa storygames guy). Sorry for confusion

Is there any magic weapon rewards in the Curse of Strahd campaign? My fighter is now in tier 2 adventures and doesn't have a single magic item to his name (everyone took everything else).

This is important as at least half the shit we encounter he's only doing half damage cause muh resistances.

File: money.jpg (152KB, 425x282px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 425x282px

My players' characters have a shitton of gold, but they've commented several times that they have nothing to spend it on. I'm not sure if they even want anything specific, just something to do with their gold.

What do?

>>49188366
well, there's the waifublade

>>49188423
>What do?

Gold diggers start showing up trying to siphon some of their wealth through copious mooching and dick-sucking.

I'm about to have my players deal with mind-controlled/mass suggested guards that they've gotten to know over the past month or so, and I want to give them legitimate non-lethal options that aren't "I attack full force but don't actually kill them". I was thinking of allowing blunt weapons to knock out a target if struck from behind successfully (i.e. Theif, Deus Ex), but am unsure how to rule it: would it be an attack roll with a higher AC required to hit, an ability check? I really want them to approach this tactically, but have a backup plan set in case they decide to just fight their way through.

>>49188492
waifu blade is in OotA

Senpai Sword is in CoS

>>49187961
I'd give it a cool-sounding name that you might expect of a weapon but actually has a double meaning. Like Backbeat or Seacleft.

File: 1446612839146.jpg (38KB, 362x346px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 362x346px

>>49188492
>well, there's the waifublade

>>49188423
ask them if they want to build a castle of their own, if they really have THAT much gold
There's a pdf for those sort of things
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwF09f1afXWlMlhlVUozZGY2RGM/view

>>49188549

>Forged by ancient sun worshipers, the Dawnbringer is meant to bring light into darkness and to fight creatures of darkness. It is kind and compassionate to those in need, speaking in a kind and feminine voice, but is fierce and destructive to its enemies. Long years in the darkness have made the sword frightened of both the dark and abandonment. It prefers that its blade is always present and shedding light in areas of darkness and it strongly resists being parted from its wielder for any length of time.

>>49188522
Oh yeah, my bad. Haven't actually played through either
>>49188549
my bad, I was thinking of OotA, there's a Sunblade there, and she's top tier waifu material

>>49181797

>the DM doesn't force singing bards to get microphones

Faggotry

>>49188601
When there's a working artificer in 5e, I'll get a microphone, don't worry

File: 1423065762427.png (487KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

487KB, 900x900px

>>49188593
>>49188596
>>49188492

Dawnbringer is pure! PURE! Her love of constant handholding and getting pulled out in dark places is not lewd!

>>49187766
Merçi

>>49187766
I never realised how few spells had the ritual tag. Seems strange that things like Speak with Dead don't.

>>49188818
Yeah, that always bothered me
but otherwise, not many other spells are missing the ritual tag really
I'm guessing we'll have to wait for more spells to get more rituals, we do have a relatively low number of spells altogether for now

>>49188522
ok because we are doing adventure league, and it's very sparse with giving away nice items

>>49185900
>undermeme

Ah, gotcha. You're just a faggot.

>>49183293

>he doesn't have a constant minor illusion on to soundtrack his life


HOW DO YOU EVEN LIVE ANON

>>49187734
Are you implying that it is a Sword Girl (male)?

File: 1431287313197.gif (1MB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 625x626px

>>49189089
Do you need more bait pictures? I have several.

>>49189120
Well, you need a material component to cast Minor Illusion in the first place, so how did you cast Minor Illusion, with which you could cast Minor Illusion, among other spells?

>>49188517
look up non-lethal damage

>>49188112
I didn't say you or he is wrong...just he looks like a faggot that forces people to endure his shitastic magic show/"illusions" before answering questions or doing other stuff.

>>49188517
>>49189250
This.

Non-lethal damage is basically

'If you physically attack, you can simply just say you don't kill them.'

Which is honestly pretty boring, and doesn't apply to magic.

So if you follow RAW, the fighters will be fighting exactly the same as usual and the spellcasters won't be able to attack except to weaken foes.

Pretty boring, to be honest.

>>49185341

My instrument is my steampunk heart and I cast spells by controlling the beating, doubling as a focus and a somatic

Your move.

>>49189327
Well, it might be boring, but you're wrong about magic.
You can declare nonlethal when you reduce an enemy to zero with a melee attack, which includes melee spell attacks. Shocking Grasp, Inflict Wounds, Vampiric Touch, Spiritual Weapon, even things cast through a familiar by touch or with Distant Spell metamagic.
Also, cast sleep or hold person or any number of spells and simply tie them up.

>>49189327
You are entitled to your opinion.
Blaster casters are the stupidest/weakest casters, imo

>>49185443
>I run forward, grab my opponent's head and shove my thumbs into his eyes.

Aimed Unarmed Strike. Blinded for a round

>I run forward, and grab my opponent in a bear hug, squishing his arms to his sides and choke him to death.

Grapple. Next turn, choking. He can last con/2 worth of minutes without air

>I slam my opponent's head into the wall (hopefully stunning him) and then next turn I grab him and pull him to the ground.

Aimed Shove action, followed by grapple

>>49189399
Oh, right.

So, yes, the only real restriction is that you can only bring them to zero in melee combat.

Martials that don't attack at range can use GWF to give themselves +10 and crit that guy to hell and back, but a freezing ray might kill them.
It's just the way 5e is, since it's simplified.


>>49189410
I, too, would throw up at the sight of an evocation wizard.