/5eg/ D&D Fifth Edition General

>>49311996
Has anyone created any decent renditions of Dark Sun for 5e? I've been listening to the Penny Arcade Dark Sun podcasts for 4e and they've kindled a fire in my heart.

>September UA: The Ranger, Revised
http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/unearthed-arcana-ranger-revised

>>49312072

I love it. WotC has my approval.

>>49312072
>>49312164
The ranger in my party immediately messaged me and was like, "Can I switch to this?"

>>49311996
Unfortunately everything in my game so far is varying degrees of !Europe or uncharted savage land.

>>49312046
It's not really that hard to transfer 2e rules to 5e, honestly, due to the relative scarcity of complex rules in both games.
In some ways it's easier then 3e and 4e because those have so much added complexity that you have to remove or pair down most skills and abilities.

>>49312072

This would be perfect if general ranger didn't get miffed out of Extra Attack.

>>49312225

Extra Attack being moved to subclasses is a suggestion I'd made many times. I'm glad WotC decided to go with it.

>>49312225
It's not that bad since you only don't get it if you're a Beastmaster-type guy.

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

1B, 486x500px

So what do you guys think?
Is revised ranger good?
Is revised beastmaster good?

>>49312326
>literally came out today

The best you're gonna get is: It looks alright. Needs testing.

>>49312326
I like the look of it, but I'll have to run some actual tests in actual play first.

>>49312279
And the Beast Conclave gets an independent attack from the beast PLUS a reaction attack from the beast when the ranger attacks.

>>49312255

The ranger is a MARTIAL class though, he should not be pushed into the rogue tier of attacks, and it makes Beast not really worth it since you're still missing out on on the attacks/ your animal companion has to be next to the guy.

>>49312366
Yeah, so it's just one archetype that lacks the extra attack, really.
Like I said, need to play it first.
>>49312368
I'm guessing in actual play it won't matter that much.
Just need to try it out a bit and find out rather then jump to conclusions before you actually try anything.

>>49312368
You're only missing out on a THIRD attack for the round if the beast isn't nearby.

The second attack is the one the beast gets to take on its own turn.

>>49312326
Natural Explorer makes it a really good (maybe a bit too good) utility dip, but none of the changes there are particularly bad. It's a better revision than redoing the entire class like the ambuscade ranger was doing.

That said, there are still a few problems. The beast companion still never gets magical attacks, there's no spell sharing to help keep on-par with the other rangers with Hunter's Mark and such, and the beast's offensive abilities actually scale a bit worse now due to not having your proficiency to their attack rolls. At least they are a bit more survivable now and can easily be brought back to life.

>>49312368
>>49312415

Indeed. And with the new Favored Enemy, your attacks have a good chance of connecting a lot more often. I can already see a Ranger with Archery fighting style. +9 to hit FE at level 2 is pretty good. Throw in Sharpshooter and it gets a bit ridiculous by level 5.

>>49312415
>>49312368
When you consider the animal companion's whirlwind attack, reaction attack, and ability to set up flanks, it's definitely better than the extra attack.

>>49312458

Its only to damage, not to hit.

>>49312458
The FE bonus is to damage, not attack.

>>49312482

Oh, I thought it said to the attack roll. Whoops. Well then, scratch that, you'll just be tearing through your FE's rather than hitting them more often.

Chaotic characters are more often than not cancerous if you're playing with anyone but the best.

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

1B, 486x500px

>>49312046
I don't like the Bard and the Psion is like a weird Monk/Warlock multiclass, but it's not bad aside from that.

>>49312072
Glad this finally happened in a way that works well.

Definitely looks like it'll bring the ranger up to strength with some of the other classes.

>>49312442
>not having your proficiency to their attack rolls
Ranger's proficiency applies to their AC, skills, saving throws, attack bonus, and damage rolls.

>>49312525
Meh. Sometimes.
I've got an okay player (she's kinda shy sometimes) who does Chaotic fairly well.

>>49312516
+2 damage
>tearing through

>>49312525
Depends on how they play the "chaotic" part really.

File: ea51c11b5ce846ba165790731a8706ff.jpg (77KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 720x960px

So I can understand how warlocks gain pacts from otherworldy supernatural titans, but I'm having trouble seeing how a warlock that gains it's power from a vampire lord can all of a sudden sudden a sword, book, or demon.

>>49312784
That's a pretty solid buff.
Especially in 5e. It's not overwhelmingly powerful but it's not supposed to be either.

>>49312811
Vampire gives him a weapon, a Book of Shadows, or a fiendish familiar.
Simple.

>>49312699
Read the new UA.

Their proficiency bonus in this version applies to their AC and damage rolls, not to their attack rolls.

>>49312811
Mind you, it's not a regular vampire from the Monsterous Manual.
It's someone of great magical power besides, such as Kas or Strahd von Zarovich. Besides, it could also be a Lich you make your Pact with.

>>49312820
I do think it's a good and needed buff, I just don't think it's going to be make it a "tearing through" level. HP bloat is real.

New to 5e and I was looking at the Warlock class and thought it was really cool that they could summon a weapon at will. Any advice for making a Pact of the Blade Warlock? I'm not sure what Patron I'm on, but I think that Great Old One is pretty cool, although I'd also be willing to use Fiend.

>>49312942
>thought it was really cool that they could summon a weapon at will
If that's what you liked, take a look at Eldritch Knight.

Pact of the Blade is hard-mode.

Would you allow a player to play as a Vistani warlock who's patron is Strahd in a non-CoS campaign? The build is a variant human, but instead of a feat, he get's the Evil Eye ability.

>>49312882
It says that it does in the blurb "Keeping Track of Proficiency," directly under Companions Bond.

The wording is a bit weird, but it then says in Companion's Bond that it uses ranger's proficiency bonus as its own. It follows with, "in addition to the areas where it normally adds its proficiency bonus," meaning attack rolls still get the bonus.

>>49312981
Yeah, sounds fine.

>>49312442
It says in addition to when it would normally get a proficiency bonus, meaning attacks are included.

>>49312981
I'd be a little unusual, especially given the weirdly variable nature of Evil Eye, but sure.
Make sure they actually read about the Vistini though, they're pretty strange and their culture does not lend itself well to heroes and adventurers.

>>49313028
>>49313058
My point is:

PHB Beast Master: companion gets your proficiency added to its normal attack roll bonus, giving it a great to-hit.

Revised Ranger: beast companion uses its proficiency bonus as normal, only increasing at the same rate your PB does, so it has a much lower to-hit.

The sharing of ASIs helps that in the long term, but it will still end up with a lower bonus to attack rolls than the PHB beast companion.

File: RTFM.jpg (320KB, 500x572px) Image search: [Google]

320KB, 500x572px

>>49312882
>Read the new UA.
>Their proficiency bonus in this version applies to their AC and damage rolls, not to their attack rolls.
>When you gain your animal companion at 3rd level, its proficiency bonus matches yours at +2. As you gain levels and increase your proficiency bonus, remember that your companion’s proficiency bonus improves as
well, and is applied to the following areas: Armor Class, skills, saving throws, attack bonus, and damage rolls.

>>49313129
Seems like a fair trade compared to dying to a stiff breeze like the PHB Beast Master. A couple of the recommended companions have 15 or 16 for their attack ability score, so they'll scale at about the same rate as a point-buy player.

>>49312942
The Pact of the Blade Warlock is a skirmisher who swaps between cantrip ranged attacks (eldritch blast*/chill touch) and pact weapon melee attacks with cantrip defenses (blade ward/fiendish vigor*).

Basic play is pew pew from a distance until the foes close in with the front ranks, then dive in to attack in melee or engage enemy ranged users face to face.

If you are looking for more of a front line or melee combatant you want to look at Eldritch Knight.

>>49313155
Read the paragraph right after that box.

It doesn't get your PB as a bonus to its normal stats EXCEPT for damage rolls and AC. Otherwise its stuff is calculated using the normal PB + ability mod rules.

>>49312942
If you want dedicated melee lock, start with 1 level in fighter, switch to warlock until you get the extra attack invocation, i think it's called Blade of Thirst? Then take another 2 or 3 levels in fighter, probably battle master, before going the rest of the way into warlock. Otherwise just pick up Agonizing Blast, which you'll want anyway, and play him like a switch hitter. Go STR if you do the fighter dip, go DEX if you don't.

>>49313175
Different anon here, but it literally says
>in addition to areas where it normally uses its proficiency bonus...
Which, according to the box just before it, does include attack bonuses.

>>49312942
>>49313208
Also, you go dedicated front line, pick up Armor of Agathys and later get Fire Shield. Make sure you cast Hex a lot. Also, regardless of whether you go STR or DEX, Darkness + the darkvision pact is really good for you.

>>49313226
It does use its proficiency bonus, by having PB + ability mod, already calculated in the stat blocks.

>>49312326
>As a rule of thumb, a beast can serve as an animal companion if it is Medium or smaller, has 15 or fewer hit points, and cannot deal more than 8 damage with a single attack. In general, that applies to creatures with a challenge rating of 1/4 or less, but there are exceptions.

>and cannot deal more than 8 damage with a single attack

So Giant Poisonous Snake is no longer legal, then? That's bullshit.

>Readan Plant Growth's description
>Has a neat out of combat use
>As well as a combat use

That's cool as shit. Any other spells out there what have multiple purposes?

>>49313238
No, it doesn't use ITS proficiency bonus.
In the sentence before, it states it uses the ranger's proficiency bonus, rather than its own.

>>49313258
And its proficiency bonus starts at +2 like all other creatures, so it only changes if your proficiency bonus is higher. And the point remains--it doesn't add your proficiency bonus on top of its remaining stats like the PHB beast master, which was my initial point and that I've already said will usually work out fine because of the extra ASIs, but it will still normally have a lower to-hit than the PHB beast master.

>>49313253
You ought to read the 3.5 Plant Growth effect.
It was such a broken spell for its level.

>>49313246
Though a lot of the normal animal companions listed in the UA can deal over 8.

It's a rule of thumb, not a hard rule.

>>49313288
What 1/4 CR beasts have that high an attack bonus anyways?

Was going to make a big post about the new UA, then my browser crashed and ate the text. So here's the condensed version:

It's good, probably needs a bit more fine-tuning of wording for a few things (the discussion going on right now about Beastmaster and whether or not the companion uses Ranger proficiency for attack rolls as well. Yes, it does), more testing needed for ways to let the companion's attacks be considered magical for purposes of overcoming damage resistance/immunities (I'd probably throw it in at the level 7 class feature, as that's 1 level later than the Monk's unarmed attacks becoming magical, and require another small ritual to turn the beast's natural weapons into magical).

Deep Stalker might be a bit frontloaded (getting darkvision along with extended range on it at 3rd level), but considering it's probably intended for Drizz't to have, that's ok.

Everything else is small buffs to it's movement and survivability, which isn't needed, but is nice.

>>49313288
>>49313415
Never mind. I'm retarded.

File: jason bulmahn is a dumb cunt who is bad at game design.jpg (205KB, 1349x386px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 1349x386px

>>49312072
Compare what's written in that article and the PDF to what Jason "I Am Terrible At Game Design" Buhlman wrote when called out on caster supremacy. It's like night and fucking day when it comes to attitude here.

So, which beast is the best for beastmaster?

>>49312805
That's the point of not saying 'all are' and instead 'most are'

People who make edgy characters are likely to end up heading towards chaotic neutral as they won't want to be confined to 'being evil' or 'being good' or confined to being anything really, and chaotic is just the 'I do what I want, Mom!'

Or, someone will make a batshit insane character, who'll become a chaotic stupid.

>>49312703
If the player looks more the sort to tend towards nice characters like lawful good or something and they go and defy expectations and make a chaotic neutral or lawful evil character, they're probably okay as they're choosing those alignments for an interesting character rather than making a character that reflects what they want to be.

>>49313518
Probably wolf cause the prone on attack. But now that this is present I can think of other stuff like the panther with two attacks with pounce, and the boar.

>>49313518

Hillary "The Corrupter" Clinton. She's OP except she's have seizures occasionally

>>49311996
>Egypt

A polite reminder that in this edition Litches explicitly need to eat souls, but noting is said about mummies. Mummy Lordship is the way forward for trouble free immortality; please update all /tg/ memes appropriately.

>>49313538
>If the player looks more the sort to tend towards nice characters like lawful good or something and they go and defy expectations and make a chaotic neutral or lawful evil character, they're probably okay as they're choosing those alignments for an interesting character rather than making a character that reflects what they want to be.

Right now she's CN, verging on just TN.
She's not particularly good, but isn't cruel, is highly sensible and practical, and generally only works when expecting to get paid for it. I guess you'd call her character a "professional" adventurer as she treats it like a business, and though she's willing to lower rates for people who can't pay as much she does expect payment for work.

>>49313472
Speaking of that, how well are martials balanced vs casters in 5e? I haven't really been following 5e, but if it's decently balanced I might be inclined to pick it up.

How does the Mind Flayer "Extract Brain" works?

It must incapacitate the humanoid and then roll the hit? If it's incapacitated why there is need to hit?

>>49313618
>A polite reminder that in this edition Litches explicitly need to eat souls, but noting is said about mummies.
That's how it was in 2e too, actually.
There wasn't hard mechanics to it but it was mentioned here and there.
I would also personally rule that (as befitting the theme), mummies and especially Mummy Lords are tied in some way to their tombs, hence the "mummy's curse" stuff.

>>49313625
Casters are still more powerful, but the gap in power is vastly less significant.
It's about the difference of power between casters and materials as in 2e I think. Not exactly mind you, but pretty close.

>>49313618
>Mummy Lordship is the way forward for trouble free immortality; please update all /tg/ memes appropriately.

clone is now the easiest method of trouble free immortality, try to keep up.

>>49312442
Why should EVERYBODY get magical attacks? Later on, there'll still be creatures vulnerable to normal attacks.

The ranger themself may have magical attacks, and that's what matte-
>no multi-attack for beast masters.
Ha.
Well, they'll just have to stick with being better against mundane enemies.

I think a feature like 'Your pet acts as if it has a magical weapon for the purpose of hurting favoured enemies' would work well, considering the lack of multi-attack already clashes with not getting +2 or +4 to damage every single time you hurt said enemies, or triggering hunter marks.

Advantage on initiative as a level 1 feature is pretty stupid, when you have to wade through the shite that is Barbarian After Level 5 to get it otherwise.
Assassin feature as a level 1 thing might be okay.
And then hunter conclave stealing rogue features is kind of.. Eh.

I think they should focus on unique abilities rather than just stealing from rogue.

>As a rule of thumb, a beast can serve as an animal companion if it is Medium or smaller, has 15 or fewer hit points, and cannot deal more than 8 damage with a single attack
Ape, Black Bear, Wolf and Giant Badger can all do more than 8 damage though

>>49313672
Anyone?

>>49312811
Well, partially this >>49312887

But the pact feels... ghostlier than that. I know it suggests vampires, but it seems to fit an actual necromancer better.

File: 1473474565934.jpg (98KB, 461x424px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 461x424px

>>49313625
Caster supremacy still exists, but it's not nearly as bad as it used to be. They significantly reduced the number of spells per day all casters get and completely removed bonus spells for having a high casting stat, but also made preparing spells much less of a hassle -- now you don't have to prepare three cure light wounds or two fireballs, you just prepare a spell once and decide which slot you're using to cast it.

They changed how concentration works, too, in that now you can only concentrate on one spell at a time, and a lot of buffs and such that casters used to stack now require concentration, meaning you can only have one of them up at a time.

Plus, the game as a whole is a lot more open to improvisation and making shit up than previous editions were, where they had rules for absolutely every little fiddly fucking thing you could possibly want to do. Rather than do that, 5e just says "Pick a DC, pick an ability score, maybe pick a proficiency if it's something you can git gud at, roll it and see what happens." It's actually pretty refreshing.

>>49313208

>go strength if you want the fighter dip

why is that necessary for a fighter dip? dex fighters are fine too.

>>49313783
If you've ever tried to hammer a nail you will know that just cause it's sitting still doesn't mean you will hit it every time.

>>49313815
DEX Fighters have a nice concept but I don't like them because the only good option aside ranged fighter is the two weapon build since there is no Fighting Style good like there is to STR Fighters, and also there is no weapon that could match a STR Fighter.

>>49313815
They probably mean to get heavy armour.

However, if you want to min-max, 14 dexerity and medium armour is better than 15 strength and heavy armour.

>>49313843
If you're using one hand for a shield, dexterity completely matches strength. Dexterity allows you to use a rapier (1d8), strength allows you to use various 1d8 weapons (longsword, warhammer, rapier)
Dexterity allows you to use a whip. (1d4). So does strength.

Strength allows you to use better thrown weapons, though.

For someone such as a warlock, wearing a shield might be a good idea anyway since really as much as you want to bladelock you still have spells and eldritch blast is still better than your melee, probably.
And if you use Booming Blade or GFB, the weapon you use doesn't matter a lot.

File: The hell dude.jpg (15KB, 296x187px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 296x187px

>>49313835
Seriously?

I though that missing nails is a joke thing.
I NEVER missed a single nail in my life. Fuck, don't tell me this is a thing.
I mean, HOW can you miss a fucking nail, holy shit, is eye-hand coodination all retarded or what

>>49313868
>If you're using one hand for a shield, dexterity completely matches strength.
The shield-using Strength fighter has a much easier time using Shield Master.

>>49313843

>since there is no fighting style

except for dueling? +2 damage on your one handed weapon attacks is great for Dex fighters. You don't do as much damage as a two handed strength fighter but if you're a ranger and you want to do damage then pick up a crossbow and sharpshooter.

>>49313886
No matter what you can always fuck up, you can miss a nail, and you can always miss trying to jam your razor sharp break into the skull of a drow. So yeah you gotta roll to hit.

>>49313928
That +2 adds up over time, plus you can use a shield with it. The Dueling description specifies that if you have a weapon in one hand and no other weapons, you get its benefit.

>>49313835
I don't think that a creature that is used to eat fucking brains would fail to do it if the target was incapacitated.

>>49313928
This works better for Weapon/Shield, what I mean't is that there isn't a 2 handed weapon with the finesse property, which would be freaking awesome.

>>49313936
Yeah I get the concept.

It's the analogy that got me

>>49313905
Oh, that's someting I forgot. Strength is better for grappling and shoving, though sometimes that's best left to a barbarian or something.

However, a dex fighter will have better use of shield master feat's dex save negation, as they'll have better dex saves.

If you're a pure fighter and you want to use your extra feats for things like polearm mastery with quarterstaves and shield master it might be good, but I'd say strength is still probably best for GWFers and barbarians.

My dream of playing a gnome beast-master ranger with a giant crab as his animal companion is becoming a viable reality.

>>49313941

Yeah. Don't knock Dex fighters, they're perfectly fine. Honestly, they're pretty good.

>>49313957

That's probably intentional. I don't think a finesse heavy weapon would be cool anyways. Basically, when you go (one handed) Dex you trade slightly better damage options (GWM/Pole Arm Master) for much better AC (Shield), a better strong saving throw, a better initiative, and better dex skills. It's a good trade off. Especially for a Warlock.

>>49313987
Play ratfolk and go full Mouse Guard.

>>49313957
A 2 handed weapon with the finesse property other than monk's fauxing it with monk weapons might look good, but it'd pretty much kill the point of strength as a stat for good for anyone but barbarians. Probably.

Then again, I think GWF feats and such need the 'heavy' propety, not the 'two handed' property.

>>49313998
>>49314011
Well IMHO it woudn't need to have heavy property and could have a lesser damage, could be a piece of wood with blades in its edges or something like that.

>>49313998
For advantages of being dexterity...
Don't forget that you're also getting better ranged attacks, you don't end up with piss-poor unarmoured defence if you can't sleep in your armour, you can wear lighter armour (which weighs less and the DM might often allow you to do more stupid tricks than if you were wearing heavy armour), using finesse weapons means it's more viable to multiclass into rogue along with meeting the 13 dex requirement for that, you won't have stealth disadvantage if you get 20 dex and wear light armour instead of medium armour for the same AC as half-plate, the fact dex saves are more important than strength saves and that likely you'll be better in bed.

>>49314065

It'd be okayish. I wouldn't make it less than 1d10 because otherwise why wouldn't you just use a rapier?

I still don't know if I see the point. And I'd say for a Warlock going Dex could be totally fine.

Next sunday my group will face the boss they're after. The boss is a High Tech Mind Flayer, they're 6 characters level 4.
They don't have any magic item and they have only something around 30 GP each.
There is: 1 Barbarian, 1 Sorcerer, 1 Wizard, 2 Clerics (War and Life) and a Thief.
What could you guys suggest to put in the loot? It must be something good since this is the momentaneous final boss but nothing super strong.

>>49314092
It's a flavour thing I think, I honestly don't like multiclass.

>>49313712
>Later on, there'll still be creatures vulnerable to normal attacks.
I hope you mean vulnerable as normal English speaking and not key feature

>>49314138
A DMG. That way they can open it up and find the table for determining random magic items.

>>49314207
I know but I don't want something randomized, I would like to give them something that I know that would be useful

Does the animal companion still have, for example, pack tactics if you pick wolf?

>>49314138
Personally, I'd give everybody something they can use. Something permanent and useful, likely an uncommon or rare item. Maybe a +1 weapon for the barbarian, war cleric, and thief, a wand each for the sorcerer and wizard, shit like that.

>>49313625
1v1 a high level caster is going to fuck up a high leveled martial just because spells can potentially render them useless a la hold person. That being said, I think in a situation with a well balanced party, you'll find yourself contributing to the success of the fight equally as either a caster or martial so long as you know how to play those roles.

Letting new ranger animal companions take levels in a class of their stats meet the multiclass requirements.

Y/n

>>49312072

what is the difference? seems like the ranger is exactly the same??

>>49314358
Try learning to read and then check again.

>>49314247
Since Animal Companion only explicitly removes the Multiattack feature, yes, they'd still have other stuff like Pack Tactics.

>>49314350
That would be really dumb, anon.

File: d2a0b8eaee612da3f49e1fed8c797b6a.jpg (74KB, 600x424px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 600x424px

>>49314350
This >>49314587

So UA beastmaster is pretty much the best ranger archetype now right? As well as having a meatshield, you are dealing more damage than a hunter on average. Although, this isn't accounting for spells other than hunters mark.

>>49314894
Hunter's Mark, Sharpshooter, and the Hunter's level 3 archetype abilities are going to sway the offensive part back toward the Hunter, but the meatshield is nice still. All seem viable.

>>49312072
Meh. Ranger was fine to begin with I think only people who cared about power gaming and min maxing to the extreme really had an issue with the Ranger.

This also actually seems way overpowered now, the ability to is not only insane on the already strong Ranger but it steps on the Rogue's toes as well , why even play Rogue now when overpowered Ranger is pretty much superior as you get the Rogue abilities + spells+ beast+ more health and better weapon proficiency.

Beasts now ruin the action economy as well and thanks to the ability boost your 20 strength badger will outclass the party fighter as well.


Also bears can now get bluff which will only further spread the sir bearington meme and have players do stupid abusive shit with skills that kill immersion that 5E was attempting to get rid of.

I'll be banning this along with the rest of unearthed arcana in my group. Fortunately my Ranger isn't a power gamer like most of the internet so wont care.

>>49312072
Beast Master is suddenly a tempting option. We've come a long way.

Though who the fuck is going to pick a mule as their magic animal friend?

>>49314920
Consider that the beast's attacks don't get Favored Enemy bonuses, Fighting Style bonuses, magic weapon effects, etc. I'd say that it's about on par with Hunter.

>>49314587
>>49314602
Don't you want to see the 8 int ranger as a human familiar to the 16 int awakened gorilla wizard?

File: 1464732758591.png (47KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 200x200px

>>49314964
I can't tell if you legitimately believe this or if you're just trying to get a reaction.

File: 1983132_desen-animat-mexican-măgar-zâmbet-proiect-călători.jpg (86KB, 300x400px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 300x400px

>>49314976
A Mexican.

>>49314976
A mule is perhaps the only animal you can bring in a city on the list, without attracting attention.

>>49314138
Personally I'm really against the 'You beat the boss, and santa claus comes down to fill the mind flayer's stockings with EXACTLY WHAT YOUR ADVENTURERS WANTED FOR CHRISTMAS!'

I'm more for,
'Fill it up with all sorts of magical items. Some of those magical items might be pawned off, others the players might find interesting uses for, others might be cursed in an awkward way and some might not be what it first appears'

I prefer to make magical weapons with both upsides and downsides to them, and require players think about how they want to use an item rather than just give them a plain, boring +1 weapon.

In particular, this would be boring to martials as they don't get a lot of utility in the first place. Utility items provide a means for martials to do a much wider variety of stuff.

For example, there may be a warhammer in the loot that reacts to fire magic, gaining additional effects when fire magic is cast on it. Sustaining this effect for too long could hurt the wielder, however, and ice magic might damage the weapon. Good for fighter-mage relations or to promote EKness.

Items of dubious use such as a ornate wand that stores a random, unknown-until-cast spell every day, picking the target before you find out the effect.

If players don't like something, they might be able to trade it for money or a favour or another item.

However, the simplest, boring method is just to give everybody a +1 version of whatever weapon everybody already has.

Party decided to look for an arena to win money. So next session I have to prep up a tournament with different categories.

Got any level 10 characters you wanna lend as NPC participants, /5eg/? Its a non-lethal tourney unless two parties of a fight agree to a fight to the death.

>Still no horse as animal companion
Fuck my shit up

File: bait mimic.png (210KB, 579x399px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 579x399px

>>49314964

File: 350e6bf2ee65495bae01e5c96019a7d1[1].png (15KB, 342x108px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 342x108px

>>49315000
It gains favored enemies

>>49315037
This, I'm Mexican and now I really want to play a fat half ling with a sombrero, crossbow and bolt bandolier, getting in all sorts of hi jinks with his trusty mule side kick.

>>49314138
A dagger that expands crit range to Natural 19-20 for the user and for those attacking the user.

>>49315059
We're not playing WoD here, if anyone gives you a funny look tell them this is the bear that tore the throat out of a dragon. Animal Companions seem to be heroes in their own right now and certainly no more discomforting than letting a bloody half-orc wander near your womenfolk.

>>49315084
I'm still in waiting for a chance to use a Barbarian5/Rogue5, expertise in athletics, rapier and shield.
Grapple+shove and alot of kickass.

Still, there are a lot of cheap tricks you can pull off if you take level 10 characters, and it might be unfair to players.
Similarly, there are many very unfair things players could do if it's a 1v1.

In a fight of a barbarian against a caster for example, a caster might just fly and kill the barbarian who then can't do anything.
Normally the 'darkness' spell with devil's sight is limited by the fact it also blinds your teammates. Without teammates, it gives ridiculous 1v1 potential.
A swashbuckler rogue can endlessly kite a melee user.
Many casters might be able to use a spell such as 'sleep' before setting up a trap that's sure to kill the target once they awaken.

There are many, many ways a 1v1 can go wrong, so I hope you're intending this to be an arena team fight. Otherwise, be prepared to put many, many rules on the arena fights.

Also note that ranged characters can't by RAW do non-lethal damage.

>>49315025
I'm serious. Thinking about it a bit more the Ranger is an insane level 1 multiclass dip, you get a huge amount of abilities including natural explorer which is utterly bonkers. I actually don't know why any martial class wouldn't take a dip into ranger.

I mean for 1 level , which sure means you miss out on a feat or +2 ability you get.

Favored Enemy. ( Pick Humanoid and it's essentially +2 damage to most fights).

1 extra language. Always useful. Only other way to get this is a feat.

All these bonuses which for some reason don't give a shit about favoured terrain anymore.

>Ignore difficult terrain
>Advantage on initiative ( insane)
>Advantage on attack rolls on the first turn (nuts).

>Entire group doesn't suffer from difficult terrain while travelling
>Always alert even when foraging etc
> Double food from foraging
>learn exact number of creatures being tracked, size, how long since they've passed and and get a bonus if favoured.
>D10 hit dice
>martial weapon proficiency, shield + medium armour
This means that any wilderness survival campaign is pointless sorry DM's write something else, every character can just track perfectly, survive endlessly in the wilderness and never starve with one dip into ranger for massive buffs. At least before having one dedicated ranger was flavourful but now you get all these benefits in any terrain just because.

This is superior to every feat in the game, it's broken in half.

All this because character optimizing munchkins whined on the internet and sadly WOTC are all whipped and actually listened rather than telling the power gamers to suck it up.

>>49312326
10/10, I actually want to play a ranger now
This is how they should have been from the start.

>>49315192
>munchkins
You might want to find another word if you're not just bait posting.

>>49315192
>This is superior to every feat in the game

A one level dip in anything is superior to every feat in the game, other than how it affects your level progression.

>>49315150
>A dagger that expands crit range to Natural 19-20 for the user and for those attacking the user.
I'm not sure you realize how bad this is. Players are on the receiving end of orders of magnitude more to-hit rolls than they dish out. Increasing crit range universally only serves to kill players faster.

>>49311996
So I want to play a Bard as a sort of crazed artist driven mad by drawing inspiration from the Old Ones. The kind of "artistic type" Lovecraft and Poe always wrote about.

Would I be better off just grabbing Lore and roleplaying it? Or homebrewing a new College?

Any tips for the latter?

>>49315192
Outlander background does half of that, anon

>d10 hit dice
That's my only problem, and only because poor monks still have d8

>>49315192
>tfw when I still won't play ranger because it looks meh
>tfw when literally everybody in my group thinks the same as me
Literally talking on whatsapp now about it, it's an welcoming improvement, but isn't great shakes

>>49313625
It's fine. But the balance was fine in 3.5 as well. Sadly players whining on the internet about imbalance that didn't exist in 3.5, which I think must have started as somebody shitposting/baiting/making memes ended up ripping an entire game apart.

I mean the abomination of a system that was 4E exists because of the 3.5 balance trolling and that fractured the already pretty fractured D&D community, spawned Pathfinder and then failed so miserably that WOTC had to go and create 5E to apologise to the fans by which time the damage was done.

I do wonder what amazing game we could have if the insane budget they spent in creating the failed mess that was 4E was put into a real next iteration of D&D from 3.5. Sadly now we just have Pathfinder which is basically 3.5 copy pasted with a few house rules or 5E which is some weird simplified mesh of 3.5 , AD&D and 4E which fortunately manages to be more good than not but unfortunately has the depth and realism of a paddling pool compared to 3.5.

Hey, I need some advice. I just started up a 5e campaign last week with a group of 5 local friends. However, 2 of the 5 friends are moving to basically the opposite side of the country. I want to keep them in the campaign, but I'm not sure what the best option to do this would be. I originally was thinking Skype would work fine but one of my other players said that wouldn't work because I use maps and minis and that would be hard to capture on camera. Plus he added in there would be difficulty setting up audio and whatnot. Then he suggested roll20. I've looked at the site and from my experiences and what others here have hinted at it is not a great site. Are there any other online options for hosting a 5e game?

File: bait low quality.jpg (16KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 600x600px

>>49315285
>the balance was fine in 3.5 as well

>>49315285
>>49315192
>>49314964
>He's going all in

>>49315315
Roll20 is the best option for hosting tabletop games online, and can work great as a virtual tabletop for IRL games as well with the use of a projector or a big TV. The bad stuff you hear about it is due to the community, not the software itself, and only because the worst shit players are front-and-center instead of hidden away in the back of your FLGS.

>>49315285
This, Druid was as powerful as Monk n 3.5, being able to turn into a dire bear, have a dire bear as animal companion and summon dire bears was comparable to medium BAB and 1d20 on punches

>>49315240
Bard/lock maybe? I've never seen it recommended. Same casting stat, could be cool with the telepathy and all.

>>49315315
The roll20 community is dogshit, roll20 itself isn't.

If you already have a group of friends (like you do), roll20 is just fine. Just don't recruit any random players off the site.

>>49312326
Does this mean the previous playtest ranger is dead?

>>49315240
Lore bard, Hermit Background (RP as reclusive artist), use magical secrets to pick up warlock spells.

>>49315240
Lore sounds good to me. Use that extra spell steal to pick up even more otherworldly and alien spells too.

>>49315192
You probably should refrain from saying things like 'Some munchkins whined that ranger wasn't good enough, so they buffed it'. A munchkin wouldn't play ranger in the first place and wouldn't complain about it. Instead, people want to play something like a ranger and actually be viable and helpful to the party.
People're going to call it baitposting if you say things like that.

However, that aside, I completely agree that it's broken for a dip and I'm dubious to how balanced it is for some people to multiclass 3 levels just for a beast companion that's completely autonomous.

However, it STILL NEEDS TESTING. Hopefully there'll still be some changes.

>>49315239
Upon hearing you say that and thinking about the item for more than a moment, you're right.

Maybe make it a property that can be activated, potentially as a bonus action, making the next attack the user makes and the next one that hits them have the expanded crit range.

Could also have the stipulation that it only works with melee attacks.

I'm just spitballing ideas here, so pardon me if they're retarded.

>>49315398
Yes. Ambuscade Ranger was rated poorly in feedback so it's unlikely to ever show up again--similar to prestige classes.

>>49315398
Ambuscade Ranger? of course, that shit first level was broken as fuck

>>49315239
>>49315417
Actually, I disagree.

A rogue has 'uncanny dodge', and can use this against attacks - attacks can crit, things like saves can't. The rogue just has to be careful with their uncanny dodge.
Not only that, rogues benefit more from crits than some others. Their sneak attack dice are doubled too.

It's not a bad idea at all, as long as there's some way to 'deactivate' the dagger sometimes when another party member isn't tanking or enemies don't have disadvantage on you or you're fighting multiple opponents.

>>49315359
Ok then. Are the map building tools and other DM tools on the site easy to learn with practice? They seemed a little complicated the last time I went to the site but I will admit I didn't put I'm much practice using them.

>>49315415
I only agree on the animal companion, they should make him level with ranger levels and not with character levels nomatter the class

>>49311996
What the fuck is even going on in this picture

>>49315240
FITZPATRICK!

>>49315480
They're very simple. Easier if you've got premade maps to click and drag in, but quite easy without.

>>49315497
Some Egyptian-type adventurers/heroes are under attack by the undead.

>>49315192
it sounds like you're just assblasted, it looks fine to me
>At least before having one dedicated ranger was flavourful but now you get all these benefits in any terrain just because.
What does "flavorful" mean? Fucking useless? Incapable of mechanical benefit but fluffy and pretty and flavorful?
Are you upset that this ranger can actually do what rangers are supposed to do?

what are your 5e house rules?

>>49315239
It'd make for an interesting cursed weapon, at least. I'll throw that in a notepad and forget about it for a year before writing it into an adventure.

>>49315562
On a nat 20, I suck your dick. On a nat 1, you suck my dick. It works out.

>>49315562
If you fall on someone and take damage, they take an equal amount of damage, before resistances.

>>49315248
Yeah, monks should probably have d8. If for no other reason than it rendering them slightly less Con dependent, which will help with their advancement in general.

>>49315562
Jerry isn't allowed to play classes with full spellcasting.

>>49315562
You can basically do whatever you want for backgrounds.

>>49315623
You should let him, but he can only take Power Word Kill

File: Dogmonk.gif (2MB, 280x210px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 280x210px

>>49314350
>wolf monk

>>49315517
I usually only use premade maps if I'm having a hard time making a map that I like. I prefer to make the maps myself.

Thank you very much for the advice.

>>49315471
Yeah, I was thinking that making it activate as a bonus action and only working for a single attack makes it appealing for a rogue, while making it so a class with more than one attack per round may not benefit hugely from it.

This also makes it compete with the myriad of options rogue has for how to use its bonus action.

>>49315599
>monks should probably have d8

>>49315655
Also, the official 5e character sheet is kind of shit, use one of the community ones.

>>49315421
>similar to prestige classes.
Which bums me out because that model for it had potential.

>>49315562
You can bond with a number of magic items equal to your proficiency bonus. So low level it's only 2 but will top out at 6.

>>49315659
Plus it stops them from critfishing too hard with duel-wielding plus that effect. Seems pretty solid to me.

>>49315671
Derp, brain fart. Meant 'd10'.

>>49315490
Much like other class features that mention a level (i.e. warlock invocations), the references to level within the new ranger's features implicitly mean ranger levels.

>>49315240

Lore Bard, Magic Initiate, pick up Eldritch Blast and Hex, and then magical secrets your way up

>>49315726
>>49315599
It's funny though, after the playtests wotc said monks will have d10, and start with d6 on damage up to d12 because they were weak in the playtest. Some how they didn't change anything.

>>49315562
Some good things I've seen around here are -

Monk weapons are treated as finesse weapons for anyone with a level in monk.

On a nat 1, the check is made again with the same modifier as before. A critical failure occurs if the character fails to pass a DC 10 check. This means very skilled characters will have a hard if not impossible time critically failing, and unskilled characters might fuck up on things they're not so good at. It also means even for an unskilled player that you don't critically fail with a 1/20 chance, but a much lower chance instead.
Of course, it applies to enemies too.

Group checks would be done more to the theme of 'choose a leader, and choose people to help. Helpers must pass a DC 12(?) check of that skill. Success lowers the DC, while failure increases the DC. The leader then rolls against the new DC.

An invisible familiar can only use the 'help' action or assist with sneak attacks if it makes its location known, even though it may remain invisible and attacks still have disadvantage on it. Using familiars in a way that has no regard for their lives and causes many familiar deaths may lead to you getting slightly more battle-wary familiars or a boot to the head from the plane of familiars.

For campaigns where magic items are more mysterious, identify only provides strong clues to magical item identity, often giving mechanical information such as 'This item reacts to fire.' rather than outright learning the exact nature of an item.

>>49315370
>>49315784
The issue I face is that Eldritch Blast isn't a spell that plays particularly well into the whole "I draw mad inspiration from beyond the mortal plane" schtick. It's just a zappy-zap.

That's fine for warlocks, because they start with zappy-zap and then work their way out, but none of the Warlock Old One tricks involve zappy-zap to begin with, so it's clearly not the right direction.

I guess Lore+fluff really is the right way to go.

>>49315717
We're using that right now in an Eberron campaign. It's been pretty good so far, really helps emphasize how widespread and commonplace sophisticated magic is, as we progress. It also sort of paints the ability to attune as a skill which improves like anything else, which is interesting.

Additionally instead of dealing with the standard spell scroll rules we consider most to be potions, the more universal magic scrolls, or in disposable/nonrecharging wands and trinkets like rings, or what have you.

>>49315659
I probably wouldn't do that. I'd have it activate on an attack whether you like it or not and last for every single attack, providing you only attack with daggers.

Not many classes would use a dagger in the first place, yet alone make themselves more vulnerable by using it. A crit with a dagger normally only deals +1d4, and any extra crit dice would likely be +1d4s.

So, you don't need to enforce its use by rogues only.
Not only that, but making it activate as a bonus is quite crippling to a class with probably the most uses for a bonus action out of any class.

It still gives 19-20 crits, and means you take 19-20 crits.

>>49315562
>Stunt points for clever roleplay, out of combat and in
>Removed the "have no (X) remaining" clauses on stuff like Perfect Self, Superior Inspiration, and Relentless
>Lowered the cost of 4 elements stuff by 1 ki point, made fangs of the fire snake free to active and 1 point to add damage to 2 attacks
>All warlocks know Eldritch Blast and it doesn't count against their cantrips on the level table.
>The once per day with a slot invocations for warlock now don't require a slot.

>>49315855
Fluff the zappy zap as a beam of pure understanding, specifically understanding of the Far Realms.

Done.

Need some advice /tg/

>Been DMing for a little over a year now at flgs.
>Rocky start but now got good enough that I have 3 players that always want to be in my group cause they like the way I DM.
>New guy comes to the group with a Bladelock, says it's inspired by Japanese television.
>Have a few people in the group who like anime but don't ever play anime characters. Personally I hate anime and couldn't get into it.
>It's cool though, no one really talks about it.
>His Patron is his demon father...
>Oh boy, but it's his character, it may go somewhere cool.
>Immediately tries to take the mantel of party leader, rest of the players are like "lol no."
>Every combat is him trying to do insane flips and spinning attacks while saying weird stuff about typical weeb stuff.
>He got mad when I told him that he does not deal more damage if he got struck with damage.
>Got mad that I would not let him turn into a demon guy he homebrewed up that did 4d8 damage with a +10 attack...
>At lvl 2
>At the end of that session 2 players came to me and said that this guy was ruining their night and they can't stand him.

Does anyone have any experience with these kinds of people? This is my first time dealing with "that player." I gave him some advice after about what the expectations were at our table and how we liked to play. I also gave him advice on how to tone down his character some. But the whole time he just gave me this uninterested look and just pulled up excuses on why his character behaves that way. Didn't seem to take anything I said at all and was pretty dismissive. Should I just kick him from our table next session before he possibly ruins another night or give him one more shot and decide there?

UA Beastmaster 5/Other class X seems like it could be a nice mutliclass. Which classes would work best with it? Fighter, barbarian and rogue seem nice

>>49316001
You tell those people they don't fit in with your group and that they're not welcome back. Don't alienate your regulars to appease a potential newcomer.

>>49316001
Kick him

>>49315855

Fluff the zippity zap as you rocking out in your guitar

You can go magic initate Cleric instead...

>>49315947
Reducing ki costs by one, even if that makes some free, goes a long way.

>>49313518
I'd say the Ape, the Panther, and the Wolf.

The Ape for no fuss power, ranged attacks, and rule bending with the shit a sub-human could do.

Panther for Prone to win melee squad tactics.

Wolf for a little prone to win, and no fuss damage.

>>49316001
>Bladelock
Oh man, poor guy
>All those shenanigans
It sounds fun, leader's rival who is a completely fish out of the water
>He got mad over not allowing obvious homebrewed broken shit
And here is when he shows his true colors

Tell him to back up a little and if he insists on being that much of a guy, kick him

>>49316001

yeah, I know a That Guy that is just like that guy

A friend and I are just like, crazy friends outside the game, so our characters ignored him, had their own parallel story, and when the critical moment came and he just wanted to SPERG THE FUCK OUT, i raised Leomund's Tiny Hut with him on the other side

>>49312072
This looks a lot more solid, it also gets rid of the "give up an attack to let it attack" problem that makes it feel like a board game. While the ranger doesn't get extra attack, I rather it balance it that way than make it feel so stiff, like the animal only does things when the ranger orders it

>>49316001
Give him one more chance, and explain to him that what he's obviously trying to do clashes tonally with the game and that he isn't the "main character" of the game at all, and then apologize and explain it to HIM that it's his last chance too.
Be gentle about it otherwise he might not even try, but it's really important to explain to him that he's not Dante and this isn't a game about his character; it's about the ENTIRE PARTY and it's adventures.

If he gets huffy, ignores you, or simply shuts down then give him the boot. He needs to understand that his behavior is problematic because otherwise he'll never get the chance to be better.

>>49316057
>>49316058
I understand. The thing is that I am friends with the store owner and he lets me DM there to try and promote D&D. I do it mostly because I enjoy DMing and I like to help introduce new people to the game.
Normally I arrive an hour or so early before each sessions and sit down with players to help them make a character that fits with the games theme. I don't like turning down ideas (no matter how dumb they are) because ultimately the player wants to play something they are excited for and all you can only ever do is give them advice on how to make it viable to the party. I did not get the opportunity to as this player showed up 10 mins late after the game started. I let him in anyways because we did not get much done. But just off the bat this guys character was being a major drain on the party. I try to keep nice with people so they will still come around my bros store, problem is that if I get too nice people will treat it like a weakness.

>>49315905
I think that, rather than crippling, it gives another option for the bonus action, and maybe makes the rogue commit more to using it.

If it's not a bonus action, the rogue can attack and disengage or hide. As a bonus action, the rogue leaves themselves open by using the item. I'll have to give more thought to how I'd like the item to expand the character's options in battle.

Although I never considered that having it work with every single attack would make it a very interesting monk weapon.

>>49316001
I hope that at least it's a tieflin

>>49316088
Fangs of the Fire Snake is the only one that ends up free that way. I'm also considering make a cantrip list to add to Elemental Attunement.

>>49316001
What's "anime" in here?
Because Legolas and Gimli shenanigans during the movies are very anime like

>>49316130
I'm in the same situation, and I talked to the store owner about it. He fully agreed with me that it wasn't worthwhile to alienate long-time customers for the sake of new people. He wants business, but he knows he won't have much of a business if his store gets a reputation for tolerating shit heads.

>>49316174
The demon dad, the transforming into a "super" more, getting more damage when he gets mad....he basically is describing Dante from Devil May Cry.
Demon weapons too.

>>49316001
>Gaming: Serious Bussiness

>>49316122
>It sounds fun, leader's rival who is a completely fish out of the water

It can be, I mean I have had players who have done this shit but just well "fun." It's just this guy did it unironically.

>I jump off the ledge, spin in the air and strike down at the foe while screaming in rage!
>Okay, because you were being so expressive roll me acrobatics, roll high enough and I will give you advantage on your attack, roll too low and will give you disadvantage.
>Gets a 3.
>Damn, well, the ground beneath your feet was a bit dusty at the jump and you fumble your jump, you manage half a spin but your strike maybe hard to pull off.
>What? No my character is good at this stuff, he would make it perfectly.
>He didn't this time because the conditions were rough for him, it happens man.

>>49316174
Not him, but demon father is pretty anime assuming the demon father is a man with horns instead of something out of dictionnaire infernal/metal album covers.

He's also wire-fuing around, and saying chuuni (tl note: autistic) shit.

Overall he's probably just a faggot who likes anime.

>>49316206
>Demon weapons too
Literally mentioned in the description of bladelock, anon, if you have fiend pact your weapons are demonic looking.

>Demon dad
If he's a variant tieflin I wouln't have a problem. Probably have demon daddy to be a cool guy just to make a contrast with the player's angst antics

>Super form
No such a thing at 2nd level, if he's able to get something similar later in the game (class feature, leveling into another class or something like that) I see no problem

>getting more damage when he gets mad
See above, for example Barbarian

Wanting to do everything from the start and wanting to be overpowered from the begining is a concern, but I don't see why that is "anime"

>>49316174
>What's "anime" in here?

Japanese name with a demon father and human mother. His weapon was a greatsword which he said was a Nodachi (fine with that). Was really expressive with the roaring and yelling with attacks. Just, his whole mannerism as well, doesn't help the player was wearing a Full Metal Alchemist t-shirt as well.

>>49316186
Thanks for that. This is honestly the first time I have had to "crack down" on a player and don't want to come off as an ass.

>>49316157
Shape the river is free too iirc

>>49316283
FMA is a great manga though, nothing like Naruto, Bleach and the like, for a shonen is actually pretty mature and deviates from the common shonen tropes.

>>49316152
>>49316001
But tieflings prior to 5e are stated to be only quarter or less demon/devil, and tieflings in 5e are implied to no be half-demon half-devil

Let's count all the big Nopes.
1. Tiefling that's more demon that it should be.
2. Patron is something weird.
3. Parental figure is overpowered.
4. Bladelock. Probably doesn't understand what they're doing, but hasn't asked for advice.
Leadership is okay, depending on how they do it.
5. Attacks not respecting the power level at level.
6. Not shy about weebness.
7. Expects additional extra powers.
8. Homebrewing shit themself.
9. Getting mad.
10. Showing up late on the first occasion.

That's 10. 10 nopes. A 10 on the 'nope' scale. a 'GTFO'.

Alternatively, give him his superpowers and cause demons/devils/celestials to come after and whoop their ass out of the game.

>>49316216
I wish I could get my players to be that expressive with roleplay.

File: 0.jpg (13KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 480x360px

>>49316273
I honestly have no issue with what he was playing, it's just how he went about playing it in the most obnoxious, unironic way possible.

>Demon dad
Not even a real issue. Had one player play his dad as a demon and it was awesome cause it was pic related.

>>49316285
Didn't notice. No one has taken that yet, but I bet that would be neat for free.

>Underdark Scout
>At 3rd level, you master the art of the ambush.On your first turn during combat, you gain a +10 bonus to your speed, and if you use the Attack action, you can make one additional attack.
Doesn't this mean for a three-level dip, any class with extra attack can now attack three times? Does this make the Bladelock better?

>>49316309
Not saying it was bad. As I said I hate anime but will not rain on anyones day if they like it. Only stating that this guy was a total weeb just from his character and his clothes. However as I also said, I don't care if your character is not my cup of tea. If you have fun playing it and the rest of the party likes it then that's all that matters.

>>49316311
>Bladelock
>Big Nope
Found that GM

Also
>Patron is something weird
Yeah, not like warlock patrons that are completey mundane and normal stuff, see GOO

>>49316147
As long as they're all dagger attacks.
It'd make for a great patient defence + 2 dagger attack combo, if it wasn't for the fact the crits will only deal maybe 1d4 extra each time. Still, patient defence makes it only a 1/100 chance the enemy will roll a 19 or 20.

But, yes, limiting the rogue's bonus attack is way too much for a double-edged sword. A rogue would probably benefit more from getting two attacks from two-weapon-fighting than getting a slightly higher chance to crit at he cost of being more vulnerable to crits.

>>49316350
Bladelock is a nope if they don't know what they're doing. If they know what they're doing, they're gimping themselves on purpose but are prepared to be gimped a bit, and have the knowledge to make up for it.

A new, power-hungry player might play bladelock just because OMG IT LOOKS COOL without thinking about the consequences, and ending up weaker than the rest and only raging harder.

>>49316273
>demon daddy to be a cool guy just to make a contrast with the player's angst antics
Will use this someday

>Hi, I'm Seshomaru's dad, how are you? Are these your friends, kiddo?
>Dad!, stop embarrashing me in front of my friends! I hate you, you demonic piece of shit!
>Here, 500 GP so you and your friends can go to the joust and have some drinks
>Aggggghhh!

>>49316314
I do too. I tell my players if they are expressive with their combat, I will sometimes ask them to roll a skill that matches what the character is doing for this attack. If they get a 1-3, disadvantage on the attack, 18 and above, advantage. Everything in between is just a normal attack. It works sometimes to get players to really describe how their characters fight, in order to entertain other players as they wait there turn. But I still get guys who just "roll for attack."

>>49316373
>forcing system mastery
That Guy's alarm is ringing

Is there a file or some kind of system you guys abide by to figuring out prices? I'm a new DM and really getting into 5E, creating NPCs and towns and quests, but this minute detail is a bit annoying

>>49314964
How do bears get bluff?

>>49316311
Variant tiefling is your old kind tiefling, the "my granpa is a demon" kind and not the "my ancestors made a pact with a demon and now we have demonic powers and look fiendish"

>>49316415
New ranger in the Ua lets animal companions be proficient in any two skills.

>>49315079
Yeah, I always do random magic item rolls. I have a subsystem for selling those treasures if they wish; they might luck out, they might not find a buyer.

Basically treats it like the rare art objects market of our world.

>>49316309
FMA's basically about how screaming and hitting people in the face DOESN'T automatically work and instead you have to sit down and shut up and think about what you're doing rather then rely on HOT BLOOD and FIGHTING SPIRIT and FRIENDSHIP POWER BOOST to win.

That flies almost in the complete opposite direction from most shonen, though the author being a woman who grew up as a dairy farmer in the country instead of being a dude who grew up in Tokyo like 70% of magaka are probably helps with the slightly different viewpoint.

>>49316350
>>49316373
Oh, also, if you didn't catch on, these are things that acummulate to tell you that the player is going to be obnoxious.
Doing a single thing on the list doesn't make you bad at all. It's like a test for, say, autism. Doing one thing that is autistic doesn't make you an autist.

And by 'something weird', that was worded poorly. I mean, something that is way off of what is the norm. Your patron being your own father is very much different from the norm, where a patron is often some sort of extremely powerful force you might not even face at level 20.

>>49316406
It's not forcing system mastery.
It's a case of a player saying 'oh, this looks cool' without asking the DM anything at all. They wanted to do flips and get angry, but they chose a class that doesn't do that.
It's the DM's job to help the player actually get the character they want, not the character they think they want.

For such a player, they player at least deserves to be told what being a bladelock means before they go forwards with it.

>>49316415
Your companion gets two skills. Get an Ape, and get creative.

>>49316001
Sit down and talk with him. Like adults. If he doesn't shape up, kick him.

>>49316470
Not saying the player wasn't a that guy, but some of the stuff you mention have nothing to do with bad roleplaying

>>49316330
Only on the first round.

>>49316470
>but they chose a class that doesn't do that
why not? classes are only templates, rest is whatever you want to do with it.

>>49316314
Yeah, so do I.

>>49316413
Logic. D&D economy is made by a child. More accurately it's made to facilitate a game. Things the players probably want cost gold, and background unimportant stuff cost anything else because it's inconsequential at that price.

>>49312072
So can you give the new beastmaster animal barding?

>>49316496
It's not just bad roleplaying.

You can roleplay a brilliant character that just fucks everybody over and serves only to annoy everyone.

The player took a risky class choice without consulting the DM. This is perfectly fine normally, but if you then get mad about your character not playing how you want it to, that's when it becomes a bad thing. It would be partially the DM's fault if the DM at least had a chance to look over the character.
I probably could've grouped it in with 'getting mad.' or something.

>>49316515
You don't choose a template that doesn't fit what you're doing.
If you want to 'get angry when you get hurt', you should try to find a feature that simulates it rather than out-right demand it without investing anything into it. A single level in barbarian is an investment which gets you a rage feature, for example.

If you take a suboptimal option, you have to own that choice. You can't then pretend you're the god of whatever it is. You can exaggerate a little, but the dice rolls won't lie to you.
And that can make some good roleplaying.

>>49312072
Would this still be good with the spell-less ranger?

>>49316585
What do you mean by that?

>>49316581
There shouldn't be suboptimal choices to be owned to beginig with

>>49316575
It doesn't have proficiency. It's DM ruling, as it was before.

>>49316620
And 5e has done a good job of limiting the number of suboptimal choices.

/tg/ help me write a fae contract

I've been playing in AL Barovia, and through a Xanatos-esque series of gambits I have come to the point where both a dryard whom I have made considerably more powerful and an elf spell caster leader type owe me a favor, and now I need to hit up Jenny Greenteeth, the Hag of the Quivering Woods

I've decided to offer her a deal. I'll introduce her to the dryard and the elf, and together forge them into her own Fae Court, (or at least a coven), souping up her powers, so she'll be strong enough to heal dying friend, and hopefully, have me elbow fucking deep in that pie.

How do I word this exactly so it sounds plausible to the DM and that he doesn't fuck me in the arse too bad for it?

>>49316620
Most people would agree with that. Bladelock still exists, however.

Okay. New beast master. Take a wolf and give it proficiency in animal handling. Logically speaking, this wolf is like a god emperor to other wolves right?

>>49316673
I had a great time with a Devotion Pal/Undying light Bladelock/Draconic Sorcerer, thought it would have been better by going Tomelock

>>49316527
I'm just afraid of making gold obsolete or useless, or making things like rations and armor too expensive; is there a rule of thumb or a table that others use at all?

>>49316714
>though it would have been better by going Tomelock
Hence why it's suboptimal - literally all other options are better. I would take star chain over blade, because at least star chain does something that constitutes an actual bonus to gameplay.

>>49315562
You get bonus languages equal to your INT bonus, because INT is pretty worthless for 90% of characters and languages rarely come up.

Also this >>49315639

>>49316744
There is something bladelock can do.

Bladelocks - providing they haven't bound a magical weapon - can conjure any weapon as an action.

Mostly outside of combat since it takes an action, they can create weapons to the exact needs of the party. If they need a 10-foot-pole, they can make one. If they need someone proficient in blowguns to fire a blowdart, they can do that.

Or you could just get mage hand and guidance and some useful stuff and instead store said weapons on your barbarian.

>>49315639
Are you talking about any number of skills, languages, tools, gold, and items as would be relevant, or the existing customize a background thing people pretend doesn't exist?

Does anyone have any articles I could show my players on how they can speed up their combat?

>>49316787
I think that would be okay if there were many languages.

Say, many different human languages.

Otherwise, players will probably end up with far too many different languages between them. Then again, many people dump int anyway and a possible -1 language sounds fun.

I'd really like to find some other way to make int useful, like make it required for some items that a wizard might not want to use.

>>49316814
10-foot-pole is not a weapon, they can only create weapons from the weapon table, this was already addressed by the devs.

And those weapons disappear if they're away from you for more than 1 minute (or less I don't remember).

>>49316814
Eldritch blasting is better than any weapon, so that's an irrelevant feature mane

>>49312072
Natural Explorer: is this tied to a specific terrain? It didn't look like it was, maybe I missed it. Seems a bit much if it isn't.

>>49316852
It's not - it applies always.

>>49316852
It's always on.
>Seems a bit much if it isn't.
No, it isn't.

>>49316741
You'd need to re-price everything based upon reality, and to do that you'd just have to google historical prices and convert to gold/silver/copper.

The easy alternative is to just put everyone in debt at the start of the game, and make them need every job they take to get food on the table.

>>49316836
I can't think of any articles immediately, but I can give some tips.

1. Spellcards for spellcasters.
2. Think about the action before your go, and get ready for it. Pay attention to who's before you in initiative.
3. Make sure players are always aware of who and what is where, so they don't have to ask at the beginning of their turn and they already know.
4. Have good communication with anyone who has abilities such as portent. Maybe make sure they let you know if they have absolutely no interest in using it at a specific time.

There's probably more things I could say, but I think spellcards are a very good idea for spellcasters if you have any.

>>49316849
You can't use an eldritch blast to take the keys off of the wall opposite to your jail cell.

You can use an eldritch blast to kill whatever fucker thought it would be a good idea to put the keys opposite a party of magic-users.

>>49316845
A 10-foot-pole would just be a pike or something. If your DM is nice, they might allow you to have modifications to said weapon like removing the pike-end so it's easier to hold.

Yes, it's still fucking useless, but at least you can conjure daggers out of your wizard hat and hide them behind people's ears as a party trick.

File: 1321984616156.png (109KB, 219x262px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 219x262px

I finished up making my dungeon. As a twist, after the party defeats the big troll boss at the end of it, the troll uses one last action to use one of the magic pendants that it took for itself from the hoard it has, thinking it will empower him, only to accidentally summon a stronger and much more lethal monster. This new monster with a huge CR gap from the players will kill the troll in one fell swoop and the players will now have to deal with this.

Thing is, as much as I'm rather against railroading the players from doing anything they want, I think just once I want to make them try to avoid the monster as possible and try to escape. I was watching the first Alien film and remembered Alien: Isolation and I felt that would make a pretty good encounter to do.

So, is there a monster that is comparable to the Xenomorph? I'm looking through the Monster Manual so far and I can't seem to find a Medium/Large-sized monster that could instill fear into the party enough for them to realize this dude is a threat and should be avoided. I'm looking to the Aberration and Monstrosity types right now since they can fit the bill.

>>49315562
Crits have the first set of damage dice maximized and the player rolls the second.
Avoids lackluster crits of 2 or 3 damage plus modifier.

Playing a new DnD campaign with a new DM, having a lot of fun - it's the first time we've ever really held a good long vanilla game together.

I'm about to be 5th level TomeLock and somehow managed to stumble across a Manual of Bodily Health and a Necklace of Fireballs with eight beads. Gold is in short supply so I'm thinking of selling the necklace - 8 fireballs and then useless can't be that great, can it? Compared to the likely 2,500 - 5000 gp I could get for it.

Keep in mind, I've never played with magical items before. I have heard gold is not very useful in 5e.

File: 1423452288524.gif (666KB, 256x249px) Image search: [Google]

666KB, 256x249px

>>49316934
So your argument is that bladelock has use because... you can extend your reach with a simple machine when you need to?
So this... is the power... of bladelocks...
Woah...

File: UA Modifying Classes.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>49316611
Drop spells, gain Poultices (Heals 1d6/2 lvl) homebrewed to allow it to be drunk as a potion for half the healing.
Gain battlemaster superiority dice and such, but locked at 1d8

>>49316977
at the very lease you might as well keep it until you need the cash

You never know when you might need to hellboy the crap out of a demon lord sometimes

>>49316992
I haven't in any way suggested bladelock is anything but shit.
Just because I'm saying it has a tiny use doesn't mean I'm supporting its continued existence.

>>49316818
Both and more. Right out the box before you even ask the DM you can get two free skill choices and sometimes a tool proficiency. Some options in the SCAG are blatantly Background 2.0, now with useful Feature edition. I don't feel like there's a carefully balanced ecosystem at work here.

As much as we'd all appreciate some rules to build a background, if a player wants some combination of things they could already get from backgrounds just give it to em.

>>49317034
Hear hear. I support deleting bladelock entirely.

>>49317028

It would certainly break up the monotony of Eldtrich Blasting everything.

So far encounters have been mild, except that one time an ally couldn't read the label on a shipping barrel (we were doing a heist in a warehouse) and accidentally let out a water elemental that was stored in the barrel.

>>49315562

>Certain skills and tools ( arcana, medicine, all knowledge skills , thievery ) can only be attempted if you have proficiency in them.
>You need to roll a 10 to help somebody.
>If you miss with a ranged attack at somebody being grappled or in melee you hit them if your attack would have hit them.
>I've created a fairly simple but robust magic item creation system that uses recipes and has casters learning those recipes randomly on level up. Recipes can be made with melted down magic items( each produces half its value in residuum) or by going on quests for specific reagents. When a recipe is used its expended and forgotten and can't be done again. Item creation times and prices are the same 25 GP per day of the cost. So 20 days to make an uncommon item
> beastmaster ranger only has to issue an order once then the pet repeats it until issued a new order
>players who go down to 0 health can still act on their turn, they can choose between crawling half their speed or taking an action. If they take take an action they automatically fail one death saving throw.
> Players get a constitution save against thirst and hunger rather than it being automatic. Thought it was weird everybody dies after 10 days of not eating.
>I've adjusted the DC system. It goes from 0 (trivial) to DC 40 ( godly) in 5 step increments.
>Crits double damage bonus as well as letting you roll twice
> Players get an extra skill slot every 4th level that they can learn a skill or proficiency in that they would be able to learn. They can also double up and take expertise in one they have already for twice the prof bonus
>I use called shots. Essentially you can pick an area of the body and the shots at disadvantage, if you hit it has a small effect like half speed/disadvantage. If you crit they lose the limb as long as you deal half their HP.
>Variant rules All the combat maneuvers ( disarm etc.) , feats, using the chart rather than rolling for abilities, scroll mishaps, potion mishaps.

>>49317046
The idea is neat, but I'll be damned if I've thought of an elegant solution to make it worthwhile.

>>49311996

So whats the deal with the Unearthed Arcana stuff is it just small free content releases or something?

>>49317072
It's playtest material. The old waterborne UA archetypes actually showed up in the Sword Coast Adventure's Guide.

File: don't blink you'll miss me.jpg (4KB, 139x160px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 139x160px

>>49317064
I could easily make it work - I just don't want to.
I would rather people just play not-warlock as their gish, because bladelock is cringe-bait for cringe-players to play out their cringe-fantasies.
I AM LITERALLY CRINGING RIGHT NOW
IT REALLY MAKES ME THINK

>>49316387
>a hedonist demon who, by way of an ironic twist, is way too lazy to be properly disruptive aside from being a major league enabler

>>49317062
More than half are utterly shit

BTW DC40 is impossible to pass

>>49316387
Any player that insists on having a demon parent will henceforth be told 'Yes, but I have full control over the parent.'

And that parent will be such a good father/mother it'll sicken the player.

>>49317089
>easily
Every fix I've ever seen for it makes it overpowered or isn't actually a fix.

If I'm using donjon's treasure hoard generator, if say final encounter has a bunch of goblins and one hobgoblin, do I set the generator to CR1/4 or CR1/2?

I feel CR1/2 might give them too much.

>>49317089
That GM found, no need to keep looking, guys, go to whatever you were doing

File: vomit dark souls.jpg (154KB, 621x621px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 621x621px

>>49317062
>most of this shit

>>49316958
I dunno, not that I can think of.
More powerful creatures tend to be much larger and have low Stealth.
Another option is to do something thematically similar but that isn't a direct reference, namely trapping the players in an enclosed environment with a monster that's too powerful for their level to directly confront all at once, akin to the minotaur and his Labryinth.

>>49317155
My GM gives them proficiency in medium and heavy (no shields)

>>49316867
>No, it isn't.

Advantage on initiative rolls? Advantage on first attack?

I could see it linked to favored terrain. But as it reads it is pretty much anytime you aren't in a city.

Primeval Awareness seems a bit much to me as well as it stands. The Ranger can take 'humanoid' as a favored enemy. Then basically detect them within five miles. Heck, most of the categories are just to broad.

It probably wouldn't matter to most DM's. But I am currently running pretty much an exclusive natural terrain campaign. The Ranger would go from being really useful, to be the destroyer of far to many plots/scenarios.

Maybe something like super tracking/perception check instead. Allow the ranger to read the terrain for weeks past, far longer than a normal skill check would be allowed to cover.

Think about this stuff for a minute from the point of view of being the DM and running wilderness adventures.

>>49317161
You can play a bladelock - if you're in one of my games, I know you won't be exactly the kind of person who gets baited by that pact. You'll know it's suboptimal going in, and you won't play it like a cringe-worthy autist.

But bladelock is exactly the kind of ivory tower bait-option that existed and toxified 3.5, and overall I wish they'd not printed it at all.

>>49317155
Allow normal ranged weapons to be bonded to and give them access to medium armor and maybe shields.
That would go a very long way just by itself.

Making a Divination Wizard who is also an Acolyte of Mystra. Would dipping into cleric be a good or bad idea?

>>49317220
A 1 level dip in knowledge domain cleric is very solid.

>>49315594
That's not really a house rule though...

File: 1471990755432.jpg (51KB, 540x429px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 540x429px

>>49317062

this has got to be bait

>>49317185
>>49317207
Neither of those addresses the fact that Eldritch Blast is better than making attacks with the pact weapon.

Would any flying beasts be viable with the new beastmaster rules? I like Flying Snake, but you can't really utilise the flyby, because of the reaction attack

>>49311996
Actually the first ever DnD campaign i played in was for the then new "al Qadim" setting [ basically dnd does Arabian nights].

Easiest way to fix bladelock is to make it so in addition to weapons, you can make it mundane items like grappling hooks, thieves tools, portion making kits, etc


And you have proficiency in whatever it is.

>>49317150
Hence being 'godly' , although it isn't impossible

+5 for ability score. +12 for max proficiency and expertise. + 2 more from ability manual , stone of good luck= +=1 which is a +20 bonus then a nat 20 gives you 40.

>49317176
Any reason why they're bad?

>>49317244
It makes blade slightly less shit. You can outdamage EB with a magical heavy crossbow with sharpshooter at high levels, and keep up identically at lower levels without a magic weapon.

So, with new Ranger, what's the new shittiest option? 4elements monk or bladelock?

>>49317199
>Primeval Awareness seems a bit much to me as well as it stands. The Ranger can take 'humanoid' as a favored enemy. Then basically detect them within five miles. Heck, most of the categories are just to broad.

Do living things sit around in one place all the time? The feature only says where things are at the time the feature is used. It says nothing about continuing to track the favored enemies in real time without further uses of the ability.

As a DM, I see that feature as a way for me to throw out a hook for the ranger to take and then use his skills to try to achieve something. The player is seeking out their own "GO THIS WAY" sign instead you having to put one out there.

>>49317347
You're investing in 2 ability scores instead of 1 to get a slight edge, and it only addresses the issue at certain levels. A good solution would address the issue at all levels the pact weapon is available.

>>49317382
Blade by far. 4 elements at least gives useful stuff, you just can't use those options often enough.

>>49317062
>>Certain skills and tools
I do much the same, but really just with tools. Musical instruments and such.

>>You need to roll a 10
Hasn't been an issue, so 'no'.

>>If you miss with a ranged
No

>>I've created a fairly simple
I understand why you might want to do this, certainly if you came from 3.etc. But for me 'Hell no'.

Might want to post it though. I'd still be interested in reading it.

>> beastmaster ranger only has
Hasn't come up. If it did I'd allow him to just use a bonus action to give orders and allow the beast to have some sense.

>>players who go down to 0 health can still act on their turn
I'd consider the crawling, with the understand that every bad guy is going to treat you as 'still up and kicking'. But no way I would allow the Action.

>> Players get a constitution save against thirst and hunger
I see no problem with this. I wish I had this problem, most of my party is Rangers, Druids, and Barbarians. So it just hasn't come up.

>>I've adjusted the DC system.
I don't see the point, so 'no'.

>>Crits double damage bonus as well as letting you roll twice
Combat is too swingy as is.

>> Players get an extra skill slot every 4th level that they can learn a skill or proficiency in that they would be able to learn.
I do the same. It is annoying to the players, at least my players, that they can't develop new skills and are stuck with creation.

>They can also double up and take expertise in one they have already for twice the prof bonus
'no' to this though.

>>I use called shots.
Saying 'no' to this one as well.

>>49313518
It's the Ape. It's stats are almost as good as a point buy level 1.

>>49317062
If I don't > something it's either acceptable, not particularly important or good.
>players get an extra skill slot and can expertise up
So you're devaluing rogues and bards? You'll let a barbarian get expertise in athletics for SUPER GRAPPLINGSKILLS with no investment over than 'I could have taken proficiency in arcana or something'?
>crits deal double bonus
So, a guy with 6 strength could actually deal LESS damage if they crit?
Not only that, but that could become ridiculous to a GWF barbarian. A GWF barbarian can get advantage (almost 1/10 crit chance) and then +10 (GWF) +7 (strength) +4 (rage bonus) to damage, before working out magical weapon damage,and that would be doubled? Crits aren't meant to deal double damage. Crits already:
1. Automatically hit
2. Deal extra damage
3. Potentially deal even more damage
without giving them double GWF damage and such. GWF doesn't affect crit chance AT ALL, and GWF will always work if you crit, regardless of the enemy's AC.
It also buffs things like eldritch blast, but debuffs things like firebolt in comparison, and monsters and most casters in general compared to martials.
>miss with a ranged attack into melee
Just because an archer misses, doesn't mean it's attacking someone else entirely. Just because an enemy has 40 AC doesn't mean projectiles deflect at allies when you roll a 19 to get 39 to hit. It's an okay concept, but needs to be toned down heavily. Say, only on a nat 1, and a reroll against new target.

>>49317402
Actually they're both in the same level, they have features they aren't going to use because another attack they have is better (EB and FoB respectively)

>>49317388
Level 17 Heavy crossbow +3 -> +9 to hit, 1d10+23 x2

Level 17 EB -> +11 to hit, 1d10+5 x4

The former wins out on average dpr by quite a bit, even at level 17 where EB gets its last jump.

>>49314976
You can ride it. It can carry all your loot. It can stomp motherfuckers.

What's not to love?

>>49317469
>I know how to fix bladelock, ignoring the blade part

>>49317524
Change "heavy crossbow" to "greatsword", and sharpshooter to GWM.
Woah.

...I accidentally deleted the post number. Something dealing with gold rewards and the economy. But I can't be arsed to dig through the thread for it, so here's a post.

Here are some things I like doing as a GM, and that I enjoy as a player:

Don't just have them find only gold or be able to immediately sell things that aren't, and don't describe non-gold things to them as just a text blurb with a gold value (so don't say, 'you find a goblet worth 25 gold').

Have them find art objects, gems and jewelry, and trade goods. It lets you keep the exact gold value less explicit and they'll probably hold on to the interesting (and most valuable) things for one reason or another. If they find themselves tight on raw cash they can liquidate things like that, or you can dangle another carrot to direct them towards other things you've prepared or created; "You're an adventurer, ay? Sure, I can cut you a deal on this armor--if you retrieve somethin' fer me..."
Feel free to also tailor non-gold finds to the players. Let the bard find a beautiful lute in the bandit's hideout; let the monk find old, rare prayer beads with inscriptions of lost koans. The snooty elf wizard from a vaunted lineage might find an old bottle of wine that happens to have his surname on it (you know, from that time his great-great-grandfather tried to open a winery and nearly bankrupted their house).
That sort of thing. Have them build on the mystique of the characters. Let them find things their characters might brag about at the tavern.

Also have them be rewarded in SOME gold, those times that they are rewarded by a person or group, but primarily with titles and authority, and with connections.

>>49317469
>+23
?

>>49315562
>You don't fall unconcious at 0 (+lingering injuries & massive damage)
>Auto-stabilize by falling unconcious for 1d4 hours
>Spell attacks can sneak attack
>Careful spell causes no damage to the targeted creatures for 1 more sorcery point
>Forced movement from falling and single target actions provokes opportunity attacks
>Reactions cannot be used in response to a reaction
>Spells cast as reactions can be cast as a bonus action on your turn

>Defeating a legendary creature makes a weapon more powerful

>Firearms expert similar to crossbow expert
>Dual Wielder works with martial arts, deals +1d10 damage on one offhand if a main hand attack lands
>Grappler has no creature size limit except for pins
>Tavern Brawler unarmed strikes and improvised weapons have the light and finesse property

I like the DMG option for ability score proficiency, but rogues are always proficient in Dexterity ability checks as a bonus proficiency. I like the other combat options as well, and combo of speed factor with passive initiative.

>>49317558
Sharpshooter, +5 dex, +5 cha from lifedrinker, +3 weapon.
You ought to be able to fill in the blanks senpai - there aren't that many things going on in 5e.

>>49317388
>The player is seeking out their own "GO THIS WAY" sign instead you having to put one out there.

I have no problem with that as an idea. But what I am seeing here is that you put together a scenario, and the 'hunt them down' phase is pretty much just gone. I mean, it is for a five mile radius - as often as you like.

It is fine if you just want the ranger to detect badthing and go hunt it. But it removes the mystery, figure out what is going on, where stuff is, from the game.

Example: My players just spent a session hunting down a Dragon and his goblin lacky's. They had a great time doing it. But probably at least two thirds of the session ran more like a mystery with them trying to figure out what had done what, where stuff is, and how to find it/them. There were tracking checks, there were ambush site investigations, there were perception checks and investigation checks, there was talk with plants, there were more tracking checks, and finally there was a 'let one go and track him back to his buddies'. This ability would have allowed them to bypass almost all of that 2/3 of the adventures and fast track straight to the combat. Instead of the above it would have been 'uh, I spend a minute...they are over there'.

I see what you are saying. And I like it from that point of view I guess. But I just think that in function - if you ran a lot of wilderness adventures - it is going to act a plot spoiler far more often than a plot enabler.

>>49317438
Harambe lives on.

>>49317469
You made a calculation with a guaranteed +3 weapon, and then assumed you all hits would land even with a discrepancy in accuracy. I can't help you if you think everyone will have a +3 weapon and that all attacks always hit.

>>49317558
+5 Dex, +5 Cha, +10 Sharpshooter, +3 magic weapon

>Get advantage over mooks
>Miss four times and can't get over a 10 with a +5
>Get disadvantage, get a 17 and then immediately get a 4
I fucking hate dice

>>49317585
>figure out what is going on, where stuff is, from the game.
It doesn't if you use moving targets. These targets are in the wilderness. Do they not know trackers exist? Are they not intelligent enough to cover their tracks? If the ranger keeps stopping for a minute at a time to figure out where things went since last time he used Primeval Awareness, he's going to lose distance.

>>49317596
Level 17 a +3 weapon with no other effects on it isn't unreasonable at all.
If I used a +2 weapon, +1 weapon, or *even a mundane weapon*, it would *still* significantly beat EB.

I didn't assume - I took off for accuracy. 5% per. Do the math - it's not very difficult.

>>49317632
I'm not disputing your math. I'm disputing the assumption that this is an elegant solution when it requires a feat and two ability scores to maximize instead of one.

>>49317220
Look up the new mystic theurge.

>>49317602
6th level barb here, never crit since we started, been using reckless attack since level 2 in every combat ever

This bladelock discussion is embarrassing. It's not bad enough to warrant the hate for just being mechanically dull.

>>49317632
>>49317651
Also you're assuming attacking a target dummy that doesn't fight back. In real combats, discreet damage amounts matter and front-loaded damage obviates the need for at-will damage later. Missing that Sharpshooter/GWM attack costs you more when you're dealing with enemies with discreet HP amounts.

>>49317651
It's a *very* elegant solution. It doesn't boost it by a *whole lot*, but it's not confusing or inelegant in the least.
Warlocks don't have shit they really need for feats anyway - using your remaining ABI's on Dex - which is the best stat in the game - is not unreasonable or suboptimal at all really.

>>49317631
Any creature will have a lair. I don't use 'classic' wandering monsters that just pop up for no reason.

I suppose in some cases that would work just fine, you could argue that a creature may be out hunting. But realistically it isn't an issue.

The Ranger can use it as often as he likes, takes a minute. A player may take a bit to figure it out, but after he does this ability RAW is going to be way more effective than I think many people think.

Maybe if the favored enemy was more narrow.

Something like favored enemy for most effects as listed, and a more specific 'hated' enemy for the super tracking ability - say a more specific race.

Another option would be to take the idea of 'favored terrain' in to account. Have the Ranger develop a true territory where something like this would work but only in that specific territory.

>>49317675
>In real combats, discreet damage amounts matter and front-loaded damage obviates the need for at-will damage later
We're dealing with 5e. *Level 17* 5e. Battles are attrition-y as fuck in general, and *especially* at those levels.
Surely you understand that.

>>49317631
>he's going to lose distance.

Missed this part. Unless it is a straight up race, one minute will have no meaning on movement.

>Be beastmaster until level 4 then multiclass into fighter
>have a druid awaken your pet before you get to level 10 so it can talk and has an intelligence of 10
>put the rest of the pets ASI in intelligence
>Get an animal companion with an intelligence of 20

>>49317632
Dunno much about magic items, but is you assume +3 weapon, why don't you assume magic item for EB? Also Hex

>>49317682
Have you considered that Primeval Awareness doesn't give a path, just a direction? Use some terrain. Primeval Awareness might point the ranger straight at a flat cliff wall.

Also take a look at Locate Object/Locate Creature. Those ruin your DM fun and the PHB ranger can cast them, as well as some actually powerful classes.

>>49317700
Yeah I do understand it actually, I've DMed 3 games that went to level 20. Players fight groups of enemies more often than they fight single enemies since action economy screws over single creature encounters at that level. Dropping a creature on 1 round significantly reduces what the players have to deal with when team bad guy starts to do things.

>>49317732
Not sure is the animal companion levels if you level in non Ranger class

>>49317732
Fighter levels don't scale the companion, just like fighter levels don't let you take higher level warlock invocations. Class features that refer to levels only refer to the class that granted the feature.

>>49317682
You are literally complaining about the two best parts of the Ranger for shitty reasons. Did you make this lair for the creature to never be found by it's hunters?

>>49317420


>>I understand why you might want to do this

I actually did it because my Wizard was really interested in his character creating magic items after we finished Phandelver and he got access to the Forge of Spells. It did seem kind of lame for me to turn around and say 'you've quested for the mythical forge of spells but err it doesn't do anything anymore sorry.' So I created some rules for it.

I'll post them here. They're rough as fuck.

Magic Item Rarity Chart and Crafting Time.

Common item: 100 GP (4 days) Min level 1
Uncommon Item: 500 GP (20 days) Min level 3
Rare: 5000 GP (200 days) Min level 6
Very Rare: 50,000 GP (2000 days, 5.5 years) Min Level 11
* Divide all of these component values by 4 for any consumable items such as scrolls or potions. E.G. A Common Potion of Healing will cost 25 GP of components to craft.
** Divide these time and component values by 2 when reducing an item into residuum. An uncommon item takes 10 days to reduce and produces 250gp of residuum.


Spellcasters with knowledge proficiency in Arcana can craft magic items from formulas they know. This process takes 20 days for an uncommon item (See Chart) and requires 500 GP worth of residue. Higher rarirty items cost more. Formulas will often call for a specific component item(s), if these components are provided you do not need to pay a residuum cost.

When a magic item is crafted the formula is consumed with it and cannot be used again. However it is possible to discover the same magic item formula again, although its likely the components will be different.

>>49317740
If I assumed magic items for EB - which would only add to hit - it would take a *WHOLE* lot of proficiency increasing items - more than currently exist in the written game - to overcome the damage of a heavy crossbow.
Also, if you're using your concentration on hex at level 17 you're doing something very very silly.

>>49317744
I don't know how many enemies you're sending against your level 17 parties that die from less than 3-4 hits of EB, but if the answer is a whole lot that's not incredibly engaging.

>>49317562
You can use reactions on your turn. Doing so wastes your reaction until the next turn, so it's probably not bad to houserule you can do one as a bonus action.

>defeating a legendary creature makes a weapon more powerful
Sounds like it spurs on players to try killstealing over each other too much, but it should be fine, maybe.

Dual wielder buff sounds a bit too good. Working with martal arts is fine, giving +1d10 damage sounds a bit too good for rogues alongside the fact the rogue already gets +1 to all attacks for using rapiers or optional extra reach ifthey use whips and the fact they can pull their weapons quickly anyway.

Tavern brawler needs a buff, but it would be better if it encourages strength rather than discourages it further, as strength is a really neglected stat.

Grappling really big creatures seems kind of ridiculous, especially since really big creatures don't have the time to waste actions getting free.

>forced movement provokes opportunity attacks
That's just ridiculous, though.
There are spells that trigger this by making the creature make non-forced movement.
Allowing storm clerics and palm monk and warlocks to give everyone free attacks just as side-effects of their normal attacks is ridiculous.

How does alchemy work in your campaign? I've been thinking of ways to make it interesting in my game.

>>49317800
>cont

Some magic item formulas will also call for additional mandatory conditions such as crafting the item in a certain location or at a certain time of the day or year. In addition any item that calls for a specific spell, such as a Wand of Magic Missiles requiring the Magic Missile Spell, has to be crafted by a character who can cast that spell and will need to consume any components that spell would normally consume and use up the respective spell slot the spell would consume. Components and Spell slots consumed in this way are consumed for every day the item is being crafted.

Magic item crafters need a safe, quiet and personal area to create their items as well as a set of Magic Item Crafting Tools (50gp), proficiency in Arcana is sufficient to use these tools. It is assumed that they work 8 hours per day and can maintain a 1gp modest lifestyle without having to pay the cost of this. If a crafter is seriously interrupted while crafting, for example by an attack by hostile enemies or a natural disaster such as an earthquake or violent storm, they must succeed on a concentration check (DC 10 for uncommon, 15 for rare and 20 for very rare) when they resume crafting or lose all of their progress on item and any components used. This check must also occur on the same day as the event that prompted the interruption or all their progress and the components used are lost.

Up to two additional crafters can aid in the creation of an item. They require proficiency in Arcana or the respective tool proficiencies. They also need to be the minimum level to craft the item themselves. However they do not need to be able to cast any spells that the item may require. The first additional crafter halves the time and the second halves the time again. For example an uncommon 500GP item crafted by 2 casters will take 10 days to make and 3 casters will reduce this to 5 days. The minimum is always 1 day.

File: magic.png (21KB, 264x900px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 264x900px

>>49317800
>cont

Item formulas are highly prized and spellcasters interested in the crafting of magical items keep all of their formulas in a unique magical tome, often protected by magic itself, similar to that of a Wizard’s Spellbook. If you obtain a Formula Tome you can scribe them into your own as the Wizards Spellbook.

Spellcasters with proficiency in Arcana can obtain a Formula Tome at level 3 that contains a number of randomly determined uncommon formulas equal to their intelligence modifier ( min 1). These represent the Formulas they have managed to obtain through experimentation and investigation. In addition they will gain 1 further random formulas determined by the DM per level beyond this. At 6th level they will obtain one rare formula and at 11th level one very rare formula.

Magical residue is equally rare as magic items themselves the only way to obtain it is via the destruction of a magical item into its component parts , again a lengthy process in of itself which takes 10 days for an uncommon item and produces half as much residuum as the item costs. (See Chart). Potions, Scrolls and any other consumable cannot be broken down into residue, although they can be created with residue.

Sample Item


Pearl of Power

Wondrous item, uncommon (requires attunement by a spellcaster)

While this pearl is on your person, you can use an action to speak its command word and regain one expended spell slot. If the expended slot was of 4th level or higher, the new slot is 3rd level. Once you use the pearl, it can’t be used again until the next dawn.

(Requires a pearl taken from a Giant Oyster OR 500GP of Residuum )

Sentinel Shield
Armor (shield), uncommon. Grants the user advantage on initiative and perception (Wisdom). The shield is emblazoned with a large eye in the center. (DMG pg 199)

( Requires the Eye of a Spectator OR 500gp of residuum.)

Pic is part of d100 magic item chart. Rolled randomly every level or when finding magic item formulas.