/5eg/ - Fifth Edition General

>all those magical items
What is this, 3.5e?

Building a half-Sun elf favored soul of Lathander for a new game. I was going to go with 10 14 14 12 10 17 for stats. He gets medium armor so with a chain shirt, which I should be able to get pretty quick since it costs 50g, and a shield, he'll have 17 ac. If I carry a shield in one hand and an implement in the other, can I cast spells? The favored soul seems pretty powerful, is it so powerful in your opinion it might ruin the game for other players? I'll choose something else if that's the case...

>>49516905
You can't use the shield and cast until you get warcaster. The focus only handles material components.

Also does anyone have an idea of a replacement for a feral tiefling'so infernal legacy that not wings?

Continuing from last thread:what would be a good class to multiclass in for a level 2 ranged/melee fighter? I'm looking for ways to deal with threats that are resistant to physical damage but our party could also really use a rogue.

>>49517001
Don't, just go Eldritch Knight. You'll get cantrips.

>>49517040
/this, or go valour bard.

>>49517001
Magic Initiate for Booming Blade, Greenflame Blade or Shillelagh.

Silver your weapons.

Stop trying to just outfight everything you meet.

>>49517001
You should probably post your attribute scores, too. No point telling you to go eldritch blasting if you have -1 on charisma.

Hey there, anons. Race-building guy back again repeating his inevitable request for criticisms and suggestions as to which race to tackle next.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XovWm65MSmIzQWSMDMXo0_aIpZgq9YSa2KkpO3kThS4/edit#

For those who'd rather not poke around and try to figure it out, here's the direct list of races I need to get written up:
Pterran
Bladeling
Fey'ri
Rogue Modron
Hamadryad
Satyr
Huldra
Dust Genasi
Rain Genasi
Magma Genasi
Blight Genasi
Smoke Genasi
Tanuki
Mujina
Kawauso
Bakeneko
Itachi
Tengu
Spellscale

Criticisms brought up in the last thread:
* Racial feats are near-universally overpowered; need help toning those down.

* Many races are either bland, underpowered or both - need help boosting them up. Finding more "fluffy" racial traits and switching out the boring "free proficiency" skills is definitely on the list.

As an aside, could really use help figuring out where to go with the Spellscale and Yokai races. The former in particular... I wonder... Maybe go for a subrace mechanic based on Draconic Ancestry, and give 'em damage resistance, spell-like abilities and possibly other features based on canon dragons? Because, honestly, the old Blood Quickening mechanic probably wouldn't work in 5e and was kind of bland back then anyway?

Oh, I just realised... I've been focusing mostly on the crunch, but, maybe I should take a step back and try writing up racial fluff instead? Or should I leave that until I have all of the races statted?

>>49517401
Str 16
Dex 15
Con 14
Int 13
Wis 11
Cha 9

>>49517112
Not the guy you're replying to, but I'm planning a variant human fighter to pick up the magic initiate feat at level 1.

My plan is to take Mage Hand and Fire Bolt, and maybe Sleep?

I've not really played D&D before though so don't know if the build will be actually useful.

>>49517466
I would choose Find Familiar, It is by far the best spell for anyone to grab.

Don't take an offensive Cantrip because as a Fighter throwing a hand axe at someone will almost always do more damage but Mage Hand's a good choice.

>>49517466
Minor Illusion.

File: 1450053727020.jpg (290KB, 768x800px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 768x800px

How good are hexblade Warlocks? Specifically Star locks.

>>49517443
>str 16
>dex 15

If you wanted to be a ranger, you only needed dex. If you really wanted the extra +1 AC from heavy armour, putting 15 strength is okay. But you don't need more than 15.
If you use two-weapon-fighting or a shield, you've got no reason to get strength and if you're supposed to be somewhat ranged then you should've focused up dexterity. Strength is only really for dedicated grapplers/shovers, two-handed-weapon fighters/paladins and barbarians.

But that's all too late now. There is only one attack cantrip that doesn't rely on int, wis or charisma, and that is booming blade. Luckily, an eldritch knight can get that and it's quite nice.

Booming blade deals thunder damage, although until level 5 you can't gaurantee it'll do the thunder portion of the damage. Level 5 onwards you'll know for sure that it'll deal thunder damage if it hits. Green flame blade wouldn't be too great with 13 int, but it's still nice to have.

I wouldn't say it's too worth it to try picking up cantrips though, really.

Also don't mind me, I'm just excessively grouchy at how limited strength and intellect are.

Are there any Dungeonographer equivalents that are free? I'm making maps in photoshop right now and it gets the job done but it feels like it's more time consuming than it should be.

>>49517602
Wrong edition there, friendo. You want /4eg/

Are Two-Handed Rangers possible or should I just play a Totem Barbarian?

I want to play a huge man with an obsession for hunting the biggest, baddest and toughest creatures and people around.

>>49517602
Bladelocks?

Shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit.

>>49516905
Assuming you're using the favored soul sorc archetype from that UA,

Id advise against it. The free spells know is fucking great but a wizard still fucks your ass all day with his spellbook.

The armor and shield proficiencies are cool, however do remember that drac sorcs get 13+dex without having to wear shit. Unless you're gonna be using scale mail and a shield, and either be forced to spend an ASI on warcaster or hold a focus in your non shield hand, drac resilience is just better. Late game FS will have better AC but you need half plate and a shield.

The extra attack you get at level 6 is a complete, complete waste of a feature. You only have simple weapons unless you get weapons from your race, and since you dont have heavy armor proficiencies you are forced to go dex for AC, and since you dont have martial weaps there is no good finesse weapons in the simple category, meaning what the fuck are you using that extra attack for? Wacking a guy with your 1d6+2 mace? Congrats mate, the drac sorc is now doing +cha on all his ele affinity spells.

With your d6 hit die you are waay better of just firebolting for 2d10 from 120ft away instead of running in for melee for your shit ass melee weapons.

Then, you have all the problems that base sorcerer has.

Tldr sorc sucks ass and fs is meh besides for those spells known.

>>49517555
Thanks, I was actually looking at Find Familiar because of the cool factor.

Fire bolt is more for flavour than anything, I just have this vision of a guy in plate whirling through a combat with a sword in one hand and cupping a fireball in the other, so I might stick with it and see how it goes..

>>49517656
Oh soz, what are they called in this edition? I know there's sword wielding Warlocks and Warlocks that made pacts with not-Cthlulu.

>>49517694
Are you going to play an Eldritch Knight? If so I think they get something that lets them attack and cast a cantrip in the same round.

It's not the strongest way to play one but it will most likely be fun!

>>49517700
Oh, GOO Bladelocks.
Technically Great Old One warlocks with the Pact of the Blade, but everything get shortened.

Bladelocks in general are not considered great, but GOOlocks are pretty decent. Check them out on pg 110 of the phb.

>>49517709
Is this something similar to what the PF magus gets?

>>49517731

Err, I was in a 5e thread a while back and asked about how good a GOO bladelock would be, and everyone said go fiend bladelock instead.

Any thoughts? Pros / Cons?

Anyone have the .pdf for something like 'simple magic items?' I was doing a game today that probably won't go anywhere, but I was having trouble thinking of magic items for the treasure and was looking for that 'simple magic items' tables but I guess I didn't save it on my computer.

>some type of long term, very long range hunters mark has been placed on my character
>we never did any rolls to notice what they did to us
>detect magic never picked it up
how am I even supposed to defend against or find something like that out without the plot point punching me in the face with it

>>49517978
Ask the DM ooc if this is something that is unstoppable or not to see if you should worry about it.

>>49517989
guess I'll have to, since it really doesn't make sense how they found us. we should have been hours out of range by spells distance wise, duration, and them seeing us to visually cast.

>>49518052
Could always be some homebrew high level divination crap.

It's most likely just the easiest way for him to plan out the campaign though.

>>49518071
I hope not, that would be kind of shitty of him. The plot moment wasn't that big of a deal and it just would have meant the party was split for a while. I've got to talk to him about a few things anyways.

>>49517700
Actually, because it's not copyrighted, they actually mention Cthulu in the book, as well as some other options.

>>49517782
Fiend Patron gives access to a more offensive spell list and gives more defensive capabilities with early to mid game level ups with the Dark One Luck, Blessing, and Resilience.

Great Old One Patron is more thematic with early game telepathy and late game thrall making. Shines in a RPish gamestyle rather than a hack n slash gamestyle.

If you plan to go Bladelock, Fiend is the best choice to shore up your weaknesses a gish combatant.

How's revised ranger stack up to other classes?

>>49517440
>Kitsune
>Kappa
>Tengu
>NO ONI

I am severely disappointed.

I just got into a heated discussion about how one of my players only makes characters that are complete stereotypes of that given race.
>Dwarf whos getting old and grumpy and wants to just go back under the mountains
>Whimsical copper dragonborn who has an unhealthy desire for treasure
>Drow rogue who thinks every other race is nothing but human cattle
I tried explaining to him that he should make more interesting, less stereotypical characters. He claims that all races except humans have to exemplify the traits of their race, that only humans get variance in their personalities.
The example I gave him was a dwarf who got to take a visit to the surface as a child, and they became totally transfixed by the sun, and they would grow up to become a light cleric who worships the sun. He claims such a character is completely wrong, and unroleplayable.

Am I in the wrong here, /5eg/? Are all races except humans supposed to be stereotypes?

>>49518290
Give him Drizzt as an example of Drow.

>>49518290
No, your player is just a retarded, unimaginative fuck.

I need help. my players are all convinced that 3 hours is a long session and are mad that I couldn't finish a one shot in that time. I don't understand how they can't see that 3 hours is almost nothing, and I've tried talking to them but they flat out don't believe that a session should go on longer than 3 hours at MAX. any advice on keeping them around for longer games?

>>49518328
I think both you and your players have a problem.
3 hours is a bit short but it's not "almost nothing" either. 1 shot should be around 4 hour.

>>49517776
>>49517709
Kinda similar. But it's the other way around.

When you cast cantrip, you can use bonus attack to do 1 melee attack.

>>49518288
Large creatures don't make good player characters

>>49518429

Oni are about the size of Goliaths, which are a playable race.

>>49518429
So many new players, they don't remember the cavalier dilemma.

>>49518290
You're right, characters are already exceptional because they're heroes, so being atypical in temperament is not an issue.
BUT, there's no reason to get into a heated argument, if he wants to be default characters, that's fine.

>>49518290
What, exactly, is wrong with the "stereotype"?
Seriously, how many grumpy dwarves have you seen played?
I've seen exactly... 3, in almost 20 years of gaming.
I've never saved a princess from a dragon, either.
The issue here is literally entirely in your own head, your own hangups, and has nothing to do with the player, but with your own BADWRONGFUN alarm going off.
Stop it, you are a twat and a That Guy at this point.

>>49518369
To wit, tho, I've noticed that how long a one shot lasts is based on how on the ball the players on.
I set up a one shot a few months ago that turned into 2 6 hour sessions because they kept poking around.

>>49518369
I'd say 4 - 5 hours. Highly dependent on your actual players.

>>49517657
They're possible. I feel like the Monster Hunter Ranger is a missing archetype though, and whenever you consider rolling Ranger you're almost always going to be better off just choosing Fighter.

>>49518274
I just had a first time player run it last night. It's good, but not overpowered.

>>49518328
This is why drop-in-drop-out campaigns should become a thing again.

So /5eg/, I've always been a fan of making characters who have a touch of magic relating to communing with ghostly things or calling on more primitive, natural spirits.

Basically being a medium/detective style investigator, but not being a full blown robes and hat wizard. The sort of guy who can't rely on a spell to stop a fight or a ritual to fix a broken limb like the full casters which usually get the kinds of spells I want for this kind of character.

Is there any suggestion you can give to help me flesh out this concept into something not entirely useless in 5e?

What do you guys mean by shot?

>>49518593
Warlock 3, (Arcane Trickster or Paladin or Eldritch Knight, Ranger) X

Warlock 3 is for a pact (blade would be neato, and invocations. There are two invocations that fit directly into your theme, one that lets you cast Speak with Dead at will, and one that lets you cast Speak with Animals at will. All of the other classes advance your spell progression, but only up to level 4 spells, while also giving you great damage options. If you like invocations, going up to 5 more gets you another invocation, of which Disguise Self at will and Silent Image at will are both great.

>>49518593
I suggest you check out the UA Gothic Heroes pdf in the MEGA link in the OP.

>>49518631
>There are two invocations that fit directly into your theme, one that lets you cast Speak with Dead at will, and one that lets you cast Speak with Animals at will.
[excitement intensifies]
>If you like invocations, going up to 5 more gets you another invocation, of which Disguise Self at will and Silent Image at will are both great.
Okay sold we warlock multiclass now.

>>49518369
Both times I could have wrapped it up shortly but the last half hour they were clearly and visibly tired and complaining "this is not a one shot!" Like the finish line in sight. I'm not looking for 6 hours but I'd expect them to not check there watches after two hours and call it quits after 3. I think I'm gonna give a 15 minute break every hour or two now so they feel like it's not all so much and also just tell the problem players to show up on time and not make such a fuss about time. we had a problem player before who set a bad precedent, always on his phone on other people's turns, always asking what was going on, always complaining that he was tired. Good guy but I had to stop including him because it dragged everyone down. I also had to write every character sheet he's ever used the day of the first session of every campaign/one shot because he refuses to read the PHB or do it himself even with weeks of notice

>>49518650
Just make sure you manage the multiclass correctly. Eldritch Blast is almost always the best damage option a warlock has, unless they significantly invest in other classes. It didn't sound like you wanted to be a blasty type mage, so warlock should always be a dip.

of the classes I listed, Paladin has the most synergy with Warlock, because you can use pact magic spell slots for smiting purposes. Which lets you smite way more often, and at a higher level than a normal paladin would usually be able to.

>>49518674
Well, I only really want it for the invocations and a couple of the more flavor-appropriate spells. I figure not taking more Warlock than I need for that would be part of it.

>>49518693
sounds good. The pact boons are all appropriate for you too. Pact of the Chain gives you one of the best scout pets in the game, pact of the blade gives you a neat weapon type feature, and pact of the tome gives you more cantrip options.

Unfortunately, pact of the blade almost needs certain invocations, and invocations will be tight for you. Pact of the Chain and pact of the Tome get better with invocations (in fact, one of the pact of the tome invocations is probably the best warlock invocation period), but don't need them to be highly useful.

>>49516641
Anyone got that pdf with the list of all character options for race, class and archetype?
I've got some new players hitting level 3 soon and I want to make sure I'm not missing any options

>>49518593
>>49518631
>>49518674
To add to this, if you go Warlock your 'Patron' can be whatever freakish extraplanar creature is sending you to investigate the weird shit.

>>49518563
They actually are a thing.
At my uni RPG society there's a 5e game with around 10-12 players which is described as a "revolving cast".

>>49518768
This used to be incredibly common. It's a good idea if you can make it work, but easier in old-school games where you don't have to worry so much about fair encounters.

>>49518622
As in one-shot?
A one-session adventure, usually a single scenario that a group plays through with new characters that aren't used again.
A lot of people ran Death House as a one-shot before the CoS came out.
One side effect of them being single sessions with throwaway characters is that people don't mind being killed off so much.

>>49518781
True.
I like that aspect where there can be a few levels between heroes without bothering people.

>>49518394
But it doesn't come online until 7th which fucking sucks.

So when giving out exp for encounters, do divide the base EXP of all the monsters up between the party, the total encounter exp between the party or does each person get the combined monster exp?

>>49518865
Just use milestones. So much easier.

>>49518865
Divide total encounter exp (base, not adjusted) among each party member.

Or just use milestones. But do it because you want to, not because some asshat on a taiwanese puppet drama image board told you to.

How legit is it to go thief rogue and become a field medic. Take expertise in medicine, the healer feat, and a healers kit. You can then use the healing kit with your cunning action and shit. You could RP sneak attacks as having good knowledge of anatomy and stuff.

File: 1454684857895.jpg (97KB, 437x700px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 437x700px

How do you reconcile the fact that (pre-optimization) Wizards have far and away more power in combat and influence out of combat than a Fighter? See attached file for more details.

Why is Foresight even a thing? Immunity to surprise, advantage to all saving throws, ability checks, and attack rolls, and enemies have disadvantage to attack the target? Plus an eight hour duration without significant material component cost nor Concentration? It's like WotC didn't even care about game balance at all in this edition.

On that note, why did WotC trash the Martial Superiority dice mechanic from the playtest? Every non-caster used to get it, not just the Battlemaster. The Fighter's claim to fame was it had more maneuvers, more dice, and better dice than everyone else, plus they regained those dice easier/faster if memory serves. The martial dice had almost universally positive feedback in the playtest - it gave martial characters options and since every class interacted with their dice differently, it made each class feel distinct while using a unified resource. Did they trash it because it was too innovative and they wanted to play it safe after 4E, or because Grognards whined about verisimilitude and how magic SHOULD be overpowered until they got their way?

File: 5ePointbuyAwaytolookatclassbuilding.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>49518918
Excuse me, I meant to link this document. Seriously, give it a read, it's quite fascinating.

>>49517602
To answer your question, really bad. They're not even the best warlock subclass to use in melee, because tomelocks can completely surpass them through the use of spells like Shillelagh and Shocking Grasp. And regardless of what subclass you're using, no warlock will ever have a reason to go into melee when they can just cast Eldritch Blast instead.

Combat is a lot more versatile in this edition. Yes/No?

>>49518918
>For this analysis, I’ll use a currency called “points”.
>THERE IS NO BALANCE BECAUSE I SAID SO!
Well, okay.

>>49518918
>starts by complaining that fighters aren't good enough
>then drifts into complaining about how fighters were made unique with a resource nobody else got

Pick one, friendo

>>49518964
Dude just... don't reply

>>49518918
Basically, to answer your question: grognards, and the grognards who work at Wizards. Actually, does anyone expect WIZARDS of the coast to release a product where Wizards are not overpowered? Wake up sheeple.

In 4e, wizards were balanced with martials. But this was accomplished through giving martials spell like abilities.

In 5e's playtest, every martial had abilities they could use in combat called maneuvers.

In both situations, there is a very loud, very vocal minority that complains. They just want to hit things with their swords, and they want just hitting things with swords to always be optimal so they don't have to think strategy through. In both cases, wizards acquiessed. 4e and the balance it brought was scrapped for the 5e playtest (which might have represented the best of both worlds), which in turn was scrapped for 5e, another caster's edition of DnD.

>>49518933
>some autist with too much time on his hands assigns point values to various class abilities on a completely arbitrary basis
>expects people to treat it like a scientific study or anything else other than an excessively wordy opinion

>>49518997
What should have happened is every martial class gets unique maneuvers (with battlemaster having the best ones. Champion fighters would be the sole exception to the rule, because we need a containment class for the "I just want to hit it with my sword again" type grognard. Champions get no maneuvers, but deal more damage. Every martial class gets one more skill proficiency and one crafting type proficiency.

there, martials and mages are balanced and fun again.

>>49518984
You can have a unique resource without being good. Look at monks.

>>49518933
This is stupid. Nobody needed to 'prove' that wizards are better. They just are.

>>49519063
True, the two things are completely unrelated. Which means that Anon started with one argument and segued into a completely unrelated one. Which tells me that he's arguing just to argue and should not be taken seriously.

>>49518666
You just sound like a total pussy. Hahahahaha. I'd walk all over you too.

File: 1454697379109.jpg (672KB, 910x1240px) Image search: [Google]

672KB, 910x1240px

>>49518964
>>49519011
He sets the value of an Ability Score Increase (ASI) or feat at 6 points. That's so he can have a baseline value for what an ASI is, what it provides, and thus evaluate the rest of the options available in relation to that. 6 is a good figure (as he says) because it can be divided in half and in thirds, which is important since a lot of ASIs give two or three separate benefits. He's not throwing numbers around completely arbitrarily, they're all in relation to the 'core' metric of an ASI. Seriously, read through it. If you can disprove his findings I'd love to see your math.

>>49518984
I'm not complaining that fighters were made unique. I'm complaining that the entire concept of Martial Superiority Dice (MSD) could have been a cool mechanic to give ALL the martial classes. You know, in the same way that every caster has spell slots, but some of them (like the Warlock and Sorcerer) interact with their spell slots differently than other casters. Paladins could have used MSD for their smites, Barbarians for rage-based powers and maneuvers, Rogues could have used them to perform stunts and tricks, Monks could have had MSD instead of Ki or perhaps a fusion of the two. I'd love to see something like the Ranger only with Battlemaster-style maneuvers instead of spellcasting, with spellcasting as an Archetype like the Eldritch Knight.

>>49518997
So a mixture of both my suspicions then. I really do wish that the final product had been closer to the playtest, we would have a better game in my estimation.

>>49519027
I'd be totally fine with having one class or archetype option that's just simple, straightforward damage and durability in combat, maybe with excellent skill use to shore up their non-combat functions. There's a place for that kind of simplicity in the game, and some players WANT things to be simple.

>>49519087
>Hahahahaha
An Hero. Please.

>>49519104
I too wish the final product was closer to the playtest. Sorcerers were more interesting in the playtest, adopting more draconic features the more spell points they used for instance.

And I understand that some players fairly want simplicity. I'm just salty that the players that wanted simplicity for every martial got their way, instead of wizards offering diverse options for everyone.

>>49519104
He assigns a feat/ASI 6 points; that's cute. And then every feature that isn't a feat or ASI (i.e. almost all of them) he arbitrarily evaluates in terms of how many feats/ASIs he thinks they're worth. It's a set of hundreds of opinions masquerading as measurements.

>If you can disprove his findings I'd love to see your math

These aren't "findings" and the burden of proof rests on him to prove that he isn't an idiot.

>>49519104
>He sets the value of an Ability Score Increase (ASI) or feat at 6 points. That's so he can have a baseline value for what an ASI is, what it provides, and thus evaluate the rest of the options available in relation to that
Again with WELL GUYS JUST TRUST ME ITS TRUE. Why 6? Why not 60 or 100 or 10 or 1? Why should I even care about some randomly assigned numbers?

>>49518179
>>49517782

Hmm. Okay, cool. The whole 'thematic' thing is pretty much why I went for GOO initially, but close-combat wise it seemed super lacklustre, which was what I was trying to do.

Thanks for the reply.

>>49519139
If you want a complex character, you do indeed have diverse options. They're called casters.

>>49519161
i want a complex sword hitter though.

>>49519167
That's called a Paladin, son. You'll notice they still have spell slots.

>>49519167
Then go play 4e and leave us alone.

>>49519181
why should i be excluded for liking tactically deep melee combat?

>>49518490

(I'm not that guy) - It's one thing to go for a stereotypical type of character occasionally, but it kind of gets boring if you only have a single group that you play with and one of them only ever plays as super predictable, trope-carbon-copy characters. Maybe you personally have lots of friends over the years who think up really original characters, but that's a good thing, and apparently it's a good thing that this other guy is lacking.

I don't think it's a matter of wrongfun, because it's not like this player is simply choosing stereotype characters over more unique or varied ones, but rather that he has a hangup in that he believes literally only human characters CAN be unique or varied. Imagine that were true for a moment: There would be literally one type of dwarf character, one type of drow, one type of elf and so on ... And then hundreds of cool human ideas. Does that not seem a little ridiculous to you?

>>49518788
Oh, k, thx. Makes sense.
But in my 20 years of DMing we never did that on purpose, even smallest modules usually took 2-3 sessions of 4-6 hours. Most of times im DMing campaigns anyway.

>>49519198
Because it shows that you're just interested in proving your mastery of a nigh-impenetrable ruleset, which was par for the course in previous editions but is an attitude that we're trying to distance ourselves from.

>>49519198
Because that's not what this system is designed for.

>>49519226
>>49518490
>>49518290
It's true that very few players follow the stereotypes. Everyone thinks that everyone else is following the stereotype, because where else would the stereotype come from? However, stereotypes need not have any basis in fact. When you pay any amount of attention to what people are actually playing, you see that everyone is intentionally playing AGAINST type. Hardly anybody plays a drow, tiefling, or half-orc who's actually evil, even though evil is part of their respective stereotypes. Similarly, the people who play grouchy Scottish dwarven fighters, wispy androgynous elven archers, and ignorant food-obsessed halflings are so few that they're really not a problem, and in fact they provide an important resource to the community: something for the iconoclasts to rebel against to make them feel like they're fighting the system when in fact they ARE the system.

I'm designing a setting. The tl;dr of it is during the 1914 invasion of Belgium by Germany, magic returns to the world, sort of like shadowrun, but for a different reason.

How would the introduction of 5e casting, with maybe 1/100 soldiers in ww1 having magical potential and starting as 1st level casters at the beginning of the war change the progression of the war?

>>49519104
>If you can disprove his findings I'd love to see your math.
Okay.
I set value of an Anon at 6 points. After comparing you and other anons, we see that your value is 3 points. Obviously, only a whore would give birth to such low-point anon, thus your mother is a whore.
If you can disprove my findings I'd love to see your math. Of course, this are just my opinions, but I inserted some random numbers in them, so you can't just brush them off, you have to DISPROVE them.

>>49517001
Monk/Ranger (the new UA ranger)

You get a minimal 7 damage per turn in melee at that level (a max of 17 of you use a quarter staff) , high AC, Str and Dex saves.
And after gaining a second level in ranger you get to choose a fighting style (duelist for shortswords or sharpshoter which works with both darts and bows/crossbows).

A Monk 5/Ranger 2 with dueling fighting style and shortswords does:
2*(1d6+4)+2*(1d6)+12 damage per turn with a flurry of blows.
If you picked an elf then up that Dex mod even more.
So that's a minimum of 24 damage per turn.

>>49519361
>The tl;dr of it is during the 1914 invasion of Belgium by Germany, magic returns to the world
And why you try to make this in 5e?

It's pretty easy to prove caster superiority without resorting to random valuations of class features.

Martials are allowed to interact with the game in two ways: they can make skill checks, and attack things.

Casters are allowed to interact with the game in three ways: they can make skill checks, attack things, and cast spells.

Casters are playing three dimensional chess, martials are playing checkers. Even half caster martial classes have their spell progression halved, so they're always strictly worse than a full caster at spell casting, while only dealing slightly more damage than a full caster at attacking.

>>49519389
Because my players refuse to play anything else. Also, shadowrun is not a good system, even if its lore is great.

>>49519410
>Because my players refuse to play anything else.
Sucks to be them. Just change the system, it's much easier.

>>49519432
What system would you recommend?

>>49519445
Anything but D&D. I used Shadowrun for this kind of thing, but you don't like it, so, I don't know, GURPS maybe?

>>49519486
I think I'll stick with DnD. The only real challenge is balancing the guns in.

>>49519505
Eh, suit yourself.

File: 1463439008270.jpg (385KB, 1478x1896px) Image search: [Google]

385KB, 1478x1896px

>>49519505
Yes, it is a challenge balancing in aspects that are vastly different from the ones the game is built with.
As much as I like 5e, it's D&D. A different system designed to handle guns (and realistic wounds, resources of war, grenades, early tanks, trench warfare, chemical weapons...) and magic is going to be better for this sort of game than one for beating up dragons with sticks.

>>49519361
Well immediately anybody who can express magic is put on an accelerated draft list. Militaries that have a lot of well aged wisdom veterans will not throw them into battle first and train them with the instructors I guess who are pretty much learning magic at the same rate as them.

An important note is being born with magic is only a sorcerer thing. Wizards used to be normal people who spent time and practice learning how to replicate what a sorcerer can do without the born knowledge. Clerics and Druids were no spell casting plebs at one point before they learned.

Those who can cast magic are either the image of a super hero or the image of a threat depending on the first few occurrences with magic. If the world learned of magic cause someone started casting Shield or Augury, it would be pretty cool and interesting. If the world learned of magic through Wild Magic table fireballs, then that would be very very horrifying.

Basically it's so much setting bullshit you have to shove into this. Practically everyone is going to have to get a class in the setting before playing.

>>49519198
You're not being excluded, you're using the correct tool for the job.
Would you try to hammer a nail into a board using an aluminum cheese grater, or would you use an actual hammer?

The current edition of D&D does not do what you want, so use a different one. Simple.

>>49519624
Too bad the grognards who wanted simple classes didn't take your advice in the playtest ;*)

>>49519198
You should throw in a bunch of the variant rules then in the DMG. It makes combat more interesting with cleave attacks serious wounds and longer rest times.

It won't make it much more complex but it will make it more deadly and nerve racking, which could supplement what you want.

>>49516641

Squadala!

>>49518490
I think I should have clarified, I don't have much of a problem with him playing stereotypical characters, I suggested it to him for his next character and he got really defensive.

My sticking point is that he gets really upset when other players make atypical characters, oftentimes being unnecessarily rude to the player. I swear he nearly had an aneurysm when another player rolled a half orc wizard.

I just tried explaining to him that atypical characters are ok and he should try one out.

>>49519598
The way I figured it, a wizard might have been trying to practice magic before hand. occult societies might have passed down impotent rituals and spells for centuries, that only now work.

Clerics could be a chaplain type figure, or a priest, who feels newly empowered with miracles, and sets out to learn more. Druids the same for nature.

As a spoiler for the setting, magic is being introduced because a truce between extra dimensional beings (angels, fey, demons), has just ended, and they are free to interact with the world again, bringing magic back. A druid might have recieved an initial piece of magical knowledge as a manipulation by a fey creature.

The entire setting would be going through a rediscovery of magic.

>>49519643
Didn't give any advice in the playtest.
And how 5e has turned out is fine for me right now, actually. I understand if it isn't for other people, I just don't understand them jumping onboard knowing that and then complaining about it all the time.
>>49519658
Anyone on here ever used those?
Curious how they work and look in actual play.

>>49518918
You can't even convince /tg/ that 5e lacks customizable depth in comparison to 3.5e, It'll take a while until the honeymoon period is over.

>>49519681
Well it's still going to take a ton of setting learning in order to roleplay effectively.

I'm going to predict by the way that people are going to dump strength if you don't have them making athletic checks as often as they should. Everyone is going to want to use a gun, so lots of high Dex scores.

>>49519733
3.5 definitely had way more fiddly moving parts and exponentially more splat material; what you can't convince us is that it was a good thing.

>>49519694
People jump on board imperfect systems because the RPG market is imperfect. 5e is by far the most popular RPG currently. Finding a game in 5e is far easier, both online and on real tables. In fact, in many communities, finding games in systems that they feel are superior could be impossible. So people have to settle for 5e.

Actually, I just don't understand why people still struggle with this concept today, and think it's always possible to play nondnd systems.

File: 1431450432124.jpg (682KB, 4092x2893px) Image search: [Google]

682KB, 4092x2893px

>>49519733
Hell, I'll admit that it has less customizable depth than 3e or 4e. However, it's more balanced than 3e, closer to classic D&D than 4e, and simpler and easier to learn than either.

>>49519694
I've used the Massive Damage, Morale, Lingering Injury at one point or another. The morale one is good if you want to avoid combat, getting the drop on a large group of bandits we surprised them and insta dropped one of them, letting the rest give up.

These rules all revolve around combat being less and less of an option though.

File: 7ib9MXa.gif (5MB, 600x338px) Image search: [Google]

5MB, 600x338px

I've heard numerous times that combat is easier to DM in 4e than 5e. I've only got very slight experience as a player in 4e despite having DMed 5e for a long time, so I've been wondering why that is, especially since combat tends to be more tactical and complex for the players. How could you use whatever makes it easier to improve combat management in 5e?

>>49519842
Basically, combat in 5e is to 4e as skills were in 4e to 5e.

Very little good support or advice in the DMG or PHB, and lots of bad advice in both.

I recommend Angry's guide to making combat fun. It's got a lot of good advice, a solid process, and you can apply it to 5e and get a decent encounter out of it.

>>49516994
You can perform somatic components with the same hand that waggles your focus.
Also, there is nothing that prevents someone with sword & board from casting even without War Caster, they just have to take an object interaction to sheathe their weapon first.
Read the book.

File: 1465399957292.png (928KB, 743x809px) Image search: [Google]

928KB, 743x809px

>>49519781
People don't want to play other systems out of spite because it'll prove all the naysayers correct.

WotC Isn't in a good shape right now, D&D is in a even worse state.

File: 1454780813475.jpg (86KB, 736x896px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 736x896px

>>49519139
>I too wish the final product was closer to the playtest. Sorcerers were more interesting in the playtest, adopting more draconic features the more spell points they used for instance.
I liked that as well. The fewer resources the sorcerer had the more buffs activated. It meant that if they ran out of juice they could still contribute meaningfully to combat WITHOUT cantrips - AC bonuses and unarmed attack damage was pretty nice if I remember correctly.

>>49519142
It's called algebra. If you can trade in an ASI for training in three skills via the Skilled feat, then training in a skill equals one-third of an ASI. X = 3Y, therefore Y = X/3. If X = 6, then Y = 2. Remember, 6 is a baseline figure assigned to X. As >>49519154 inadvertently points out, if he chose to assign 60 to X every single ratio would be the same. Instead of 416.4 points for a level 20 Fighter and 886.2 points for a level 20 Wizard, it would be 4164 and 8862 points respectively. The fact that the Wizard has twice the impact doesn't change no matter what value you assign to X.

These numbers work BECAUSE ASIs are interchangeable with feats, and feats can get you skills, proficiencies, and hit points. ASIs can also improve your projected damage over the course of an adventuring day, as he clearly demonstrates and explains. This allows much of the system to be quantified with a fair degree of accuracy.

>>49519781
>Actually, I just don't understand why people still struggle with this concept today, and think it's always possible to play nondnd systems.

I have intelligent and imaginative friends who are willing to try new things as a part of my roleplaying game group.
I guess I'm just spoiled for decent players and GM's.
>>49519799
Morale is one I've been interested in using at least.
Thanks for the info.

>>49519957
I think another part of the issue is that all feats aren't balanced. It'd be nice if they were, but some are simply more useful than others. Skilled, Toughness, and Resilience are feats he uses as a base for a number of his points, but the former 2 are often considered weak and not to be taken by experienced players unless going for a gimmick build (literally all-the-skills rogue or literal maximum HP barbarian). Also, he puts Strength saving throws on the same level as Intelligence or Charisma. Yes, it's one of the 'nonvital' saves, but strength saves are about equally common as wisdom saves in the monster manual and spells, even if strength saves are more often connected to weaker effects such as being knocked prone or restrained as opposed to being mind controlled or charmed. Still leagues above charisma or intelligence, used almost exclusively for saves against banishing and fighting Intellect Devourers respectively.

what are some decent feats to take as a moon druid?

>>49520119
Sentinel and Warcaster come to mind.

File: loremaster_token_hr.png (142KB, 280x280px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 280x280px

>looking for another group/campaign as schedule will get lighter
>find a SKT LFG on r20
>write it all up
>press send
>HURR
>TypeError: can't convert nil into Integer

I guess it's not meant to be, and that'll teach me to not copy/backup forum posts before posting.

>>49520024
I'm happy for you, but your experience is far from the norm, and you should stop pretending that your luck is some sort of reason other people should stay out of 5e rather than trying to fix its inherent flaws.

Alright /5eg/, help me out.
I've had the idea for adding some new attacks or "weapon skills" to the game to help vary up martial combat. Nothing that would be de-facto better than just swinging one's sword, but would be superior under certain circumstances.

Right now, I've got throwing a fan of daggers that does xd6 damage on a failed reflex save in an area and a sword technique that uses one's reaction and gives you disadvantage to hit, but adds the enemy's damage to your attack.
I could use some more abilities, but my real question is this: What is the best way to add this into the game without unbalancing things?

>>49520190
Not him, but I think weather the simplification of combat is a flaw or not is entirely subjective in nature, no?
It seems to me they 5e's flaws aren't necessarily about it's combat system because the system was deliberately designed to have these "flaws" because from an objective standpoint they are more narratively flexible and both easier and faster for new players to learn.

It's kinda like blaming those early 90's RPG's that weren't D&D for involving lots of "edgy" content and often having combat systems that are extremely lethal compared to D&D as a way of differentiating themselves from it; it's now a flaw, it's a deliberate feature of the system which has fallen out of favor with some folks over time.

>>49520182
the sentinel one might be nice since I take up so much damn room during fights

thanks

>>49520304
5e simplified a lot of things by simplifying upkeep. That's really all it had to do: roll circumstantial bonuses into an advantage/disadvantage system, instead of trying to keep track of a thousand different modifiers. The flaw 5e has is that it also sanded down all the interesting classes that worked within the system (shown during playtesting), into basically different flavors of champion fighter. I understand catering to simpletons and people who like simple combat (not the same group), but 5e should have presented mechanically rich and interesting subclass options for every class.

And again, your analogy at the end there applies equally to the grognards and simpletons who complained during the playtest. When everyone had maneuver dice. so your analogy is a no sell: 5e wouldn't be the system it is if people didn't complain about it instead of moving to other systems.

File: 1454695270207.jpg (101KB, 400x880px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 400x880px

>>49520105
Fair point. I'd say that:

1) He says these values are unoptimized values going by the game's own internal value metrics. He admits that some feats and options are better than others (Resilience and Linguist really aren't on the same level after all) but the GAME presents them as costing the same resource to acquire. So yeah, you can probably use your 'points' very efficiently to build an incredibly strong character but that doesn't change how many points you start with. If two people are playing Monopoly and one starts with 1500$ while the other starts with 3000$, the one with less funds can still win the game. It's just a lot harder for them to do so. I like my games such that every player is on an equal playing field, whether they be competing with each other or not. Unless it's one of those asymmetrical multiplayer games at which point both sides need to be balanced against each other rather than individuals.

2) Strength saves are pretty useful, yeah, but even if you make them as valuable as Dex/Con/Wis saves that means his math is off by less than half a percent. Not really much of a difference all things considered.

Thank you for a reasonable critique and response, sir. I appreciate you giving some actual time and consideration into this matter. I didn't write this document but I'm glad to find someone else who doesn't just brush it off completely without bothering to read it.

>>49520287
The way to keep this balanced may be to keep these to really sparsely using it. Let them use it 2-4 times a day, and don't just give it to all Martials. Don't give them more uses over time, and only give benefits based on single digit modifiers.

The fan of daggers is fine but you have no idea how powerful it is to attack not on your turn. That reaction to attack again possibly doubles a 1-4 martial's damage, and just adds another attack beyond that.

The reason you can't have them scaling is cause with that reaction attack, my paladin 19 with +20 to hit with her buff on is guarenteed to hit and smite again. That's 2d6+7+3 with rerolled 1s and 2s, and 5d8-6d8 Radiant from - 4-5 smite. That's a possibly 50 extra damage thanks to this free technique.

I know this is a high level example but unless you level cap your games you should at least look at it.

>>49518918
dungeons and dragons 5th ed is a role playing game, not a combat game

non-magical player characters are balanced, but only in a setting that includes non combat role play and encounters, and multiple combat encounters between short rests

>>49520516
But casters are better at non combat encounters than noncasters.

non magical characters only get better than magical characters the less you focus on non-combat stuff.

>>49520426
I was going to limit them all to proficiency per day, as that seems like a good amount. But I'll reconsider since you're suggesting not giving more uses over time. Instead, I'll probably give more weapon skills.

The counter-hit does need some work, I'll have to fix that. Originally I was also going to give the opponent advantage on their strike against you, but I figured that wouldn't change things enough to matter.

What other skills would vary combat to be more interesting? Right now, I need more options for people who specialize in other weapons.
I had a Dirty Trick option for Rogues, but I felt that doing things like throwing sand into someone's eye or smashing their toes to hinder their movement would be better left up to DM fiat.

>>49520547
>But casters are better at non combat encounters than noncasters.

Except for the Rogue


And the fighter or the barbarian in challenge events


Or non combat encounters in which the other party is aware of magic

>>49520619
The rogue is the skill monkey, so compare it to the bard, the skill monkey caster. And oh, would you look at that, the bard is better.

>fighter or barbarian in challenge events
Sure, and casters are better in magic competitions. You don't get to cherry pick specific examples to disprove a generality.
Oh, and casters are just as good at challenges if they have polymorph, or other physical augmentation spells.

>other party aware of magic.
This only matters in a subset of a subset of encounters. And again, see above.

The fact of the matter is that in any given encounter, the caster is likely to be better at it than the martial at it, unless the DM is expending effort to specifically arrange for situations the martial can do better than the caster in.

>>49520406
There is also a lot of cherry picking on the wizard side with a strong damage spell selection and using an evoker. Whereas the fighter only uses a bog-standard longsword as opposed to a greatsword.

Basically he compares an optimized wizard to an average fighter.

>>49520615
The Martial Options Homebrew is definitely something you should look at. I personally disagree with some of the Martial Dice uses such as fly invisibility and revivify, but it's something you should look at.

>>49519335
>tfw my group has an evil tiefling and a wispy androgynous elf archer
Yikes
The only one playing super against type is the lawful, super serious monk... who's a gnome.

>>49518288
Hmm... well, other than the dilemma of either making them "Large-lite" like Goliaths or else waiting until we get the Firbolg and see how WoTC's going to do real Large sized PC races, I got no problems whatsoever with Oni as an Oriental Monstrous Race.

Are folks willing to talk with me so I can figure out what racial traits to give them? There's a large variety of oni tales so all I've really got as a solid basis is "magical ogre".

>>49520698
Alright, thanks for the recommendation. Final question.
Should I make the "weapon skills" bound to skills or weapon proficiencies? A part of me wants to reward players with new abilities that relate to the different paths they decide to specialize in, but 5e doesn't allow too much skill specialization in the first place if you aren't using homebrew rules.

>>49520689
I feel like caster's are more balanced than people realize cause smacking their arcane focus away or letting them burn their spells first is what severely cripple a caster.

A DM who knows that if casters are left unchecked they do well will actively be able to hinder them, a disarm for an arcane focus and attacking them when they need a long rest is something DMs don't do.

Complain about casters all you want but a fighter can attack four times no matter what resources he's spent no matter how exhausted he is and if his weapon is disarmed it's just a free action to pull another weapon and keep going.

Casters are strong when a DM is nice.

>>49517652
I hope my DM will let me switch my dex and int around since I'm new and didn't know what I was doing when I built my character. I think I'm going for the Eldritch Knight route as soon as I hit level three. Thanks for the advice!

File: 132376652014.jpg (81KB, 398x326px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 398x326px

Would it be unreasonable to not allow characters without proficiency in tools to use those tools? I feel like if someone had no idea how to use, say, a glassblower's tools, they should have no chance at even using it successfully, not just rolling without the 2-6 point bonus a proficient glassblower gets. Perhaps require characters to be 'initiated' in use of a tool by someone proficient, to show that they have a vague idea of how to use it, even if not proficient.
After all, a rogue from the city streets should have no idea how to properly use a sextant or caligrapher's pen without being shown, right?

>>49520805
You can't ever completely disarm a caster, since not all spells require material components (which foci and component pouches substitute). Additionally, there's nothing stopping a caster from having as many spellcasting foci as a martial has weapons, and using a free action to pull out a second one after being disarmed. Or just using a free action to pick up the one off the ground.

Have you ever even DMed before, because you're showcasing a really poor grasp of the rules and tactics here.

Casters can cast spells no matter what level of exhaustion they have (and since most spells don't rely on attack rolls,caster spells are more likely to have an appreciable effect than martial attacks whilst both are exhausted). Casters always have access to cantrips as well.

>>49520689
>unless the DM is expending effort to specifically arrange for situations


Well, yes.

>>49520904
Just make the DC harder. In order to make a wine glass with a glass blower's kit you need a DC 25 check, the DMG says this is hard difficulty, which is what trying to use a glass blower the first time should be like. If you have less than 20 Int or Dex or whatever skill you aren't gonna be able to do it, unless you play 20 automatic successes then call it beginners luck.

>>49520962
Raising the DC to something impossible and letting the player roll is the same result as having it automatically fail, but you give the player the illusion that they could possibly get it if they keep rolling.

File: 1349145896996.png (10KB, 381x351px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 381x351px

I feel like the champion archetype should just have been base fighter features and not a separate archetype. Am I alone in thinking this?

File: May I help you.jpg (319KB, 551x1067px) Image search: [Google]

319KB, 551x1067px

DnD ain't DnD without the wizard throwing a fireball to kill a werewolf, only to incinerate the entire party, including herself.

>>49520929
I have never seen a caster choose an additional arcane focus, I guess it's in the rules that you can buy another but that's how it is.

And I was just using an expression in not talking about the actual exhausted condition. And the Cantrips still pale in comparison to real spells.

And you didn't say anything about having caster's burn their spells and not allowing them rests, so I'm glad you agree with me on that.

The point I'm trying to get at is to do what casters are strong at they need to burn resources, Martials don't.

>>49521041
Even when out of resources, casters deal comparable damage with cantrips (which are usually only a turn or two behind on kill times). Meanwhile, several cantrips provide utility that martials simply can't achieve.

>>49521002
Champion regeneration should have been the capstone, with extra attk 4 being the level 17 feature. But otherwise yes.

Does anyone have the excel file with the race options for character creation?Thanks in advance

>>49521167
4d10, a firebolt from a high level wizard is average 20, and that's it. That's awful damage what dice are you looking at. A fighter can do that with typical items in one hit, and then attack 3 more times.

Second while Mage Hand Message Mending Guidance and Minor Illusion are nice and do provide some helpful utility they are still comparable to just some good checks and good decision making.

Casters are meh when they have just their Cantrips and I would never ask for a wizard with just Cantrips over a fighter or a rogue or a ranger or anything.

Casters are only good with their spells and like I said casters do use their spells and will run out if a DM is mindful about it. But if long rests are plenty and if NPCs don't mind you using magic to overcome them then yes a caster will be stronger than them.

Casters aren't overpowered, nice DMs are.

Hello people
While already acknowledged to to various RPGs, I'm soon going to play for the first time a 5th ed game
In the beginning I wanted to roll a wildshaping based druid, but after rolling pretty high stats (17 15 15 15 13 10) I'm now tempted to try an Eldritch knight fighter (variant human if possible)
Which options should I take on for the EK? I heard it can have some action economy issues

File: 627px-Dragonborn_Helmet.png (446KB, 627x600px) Image search: [Google]

446KB, 627x600px

My friend and I are looking at running an Elder Scrolls game with 5e, and are considering how to approach races. It'd probably be best to retool most of them from scratch and have the various human nationalities be distinct statistically, right?

>High Elf Arcana Cleric
>15, 14, 12, 10, 15, 8

Will I be too gimped to bother with the concept? I want a character that is not adverse to wading into the front line and striking foes down with a longsword held in both hands.
Is Green-Flame Blade enough to keep me "competitive" in terms of melee damage?

>>49521311
4d10 averages to 22. Still awful damage wise, but you suck at statistics, anon.

>>49521352
Whatever, I was only off by 5%.

>>49518593

There used to be an alternate Druid class that was more of a nature-spirit class - less of "nature itself personified" and more of, there are fish-spirits and tree-spirits and fox-spirits and rock-spirits.

Could prob do the same shift to a Ranger.

>>49521342
Why not use UESRPG ?

>party member keeps being loud and drawing enemy attention
>when we aren't in combat situations, he talks loudly or bluntly and keeps getting our party into trouble by giving spies information
send magical duct tape

As a monk how do I rise my AC and damage? I was the secondary martial in my party but the Paladin decided to reroll and now I'm the primary one, so far I'm suffering a fucking lot, any help?

>>49521487
I'm the normal DM of my group and run FR or Eberron, and my friend is the one who wants to run an ES game. I have a boner for making races so I'm eager to help with that and advice on optional rules for him to use to match the setting more, also because I'm hoping I'll have a chance to be a player.
However, I'd gladly look into an existing system, for inspiration if nothing else. Do you have a link?

>>49521496
Get your Dex higher get some magical items and hope enemies roll low. Right now you just need to survive.

Your most fun option though is to reroll, as monks need a few levels to get really defensive.

>>49521538
Well I don't have it myself but I'm mretty sure if you search UESRPG on Google you should find it, otherwise if that fail see if the /tgesg/ thread if this week end is still up, it's in the OP. I never used it myself but most people I saw talking about it said it was really good.

So what has a better story in your opinions? Pathfinder's Adventure Paths or 5e's Adventures? What is your favorite one to run?

File: Planar Bestiary 5e.jpg (274KB, 612x792px) Image search: [Google]

274KB, 612x792px

>>49516641
Does anyone have a pdf of the Planar Bestiary on DM's Guild they can share?

http://www.dmsguild.com/product/193100/Planar-Bestiary?hot60=1&src=hottest_filtered&filters=45469

>>49521311
I'll never understand why people insist on using firebolt, an underperforming cantrip in melee range, and an optimized melee fighter, for this comparison, and think people won't comment on it.

the proper melee comparison is green flame blade, which deals, with a longsword, 1d8+3d8+3d8+Attack Stat+CASTING STAT. Let's assume, as normal for these comparisons, 5 in each. That's an average damage of 41.5.

Regardless of your bullshit comparisons and inability to do basic math, your argument relies on casters being designed to be put down, and martials being designed to be supported. Which is hardly good game design. A better balanced system would mean casters and martials are equally effective, regardless of the mood of the DM that day.

File: 1472872362690.jpg (32KB, 540x405px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 540x405px

>started new campaign
>party is being introduced
>i'm playing a rogue that is a graverobber (his secret is that he only graverobbs those who held possessions that belonged to someone else when they died, he then retrieves the item and brings it back to them)
>party is in a tavern
>we are all chatting with each other
>suddenly our dwarf fighter suggests we do odd jobs until we are able to take on Drizzt
>we all laugh
>he's actually serious
>he wants to kill Drizzt
>apparently Drizzt stole his dog from him when he was little because it was being mistreated by the dwarfs father
>we all set out to train in order to kill Drizzt
>after session DM says he had a big werewolf hunting campaign planned out but this sounds a lot more fun

how fucked are we

>>49521682
not to badly fucked, drizzt is something like a level 10 fighter. You could beat him with a level 5 wizard and some prep time.

I have a two questions about the Unseen Servant spell:
1) what exactly does it mean that it has 1 hp? In the description it says, the servant is shapeless and invisible. So why does it need hit points?
2) in my game, a PC sent the unseen servant to grab the staff from an enemy wizard. I made the decision, that while the wizard is preoccupied with fighting, he doesn't expect the staff to be grabbed. So I let the PC roll a strength check for the servant (having STR 2, so -4 on check) vs the wizards dexterity. How would you have ruled it?

>>49519733
5e gave up more customization/depth when it tossed out floating modifiers and stuck with the bounded accuracy rules.

Which I think is a fine change, as it helps make the game easier to learn for new players.

Personally I think 5e can get to around 70% of the customization/depth of 3.5, but that's if they toss out the idea/notion of "every class must be unique and do something different that no other class can do" and start porting over some of the classes from 3.5 and 4e and not just making them archetpyes of the current classes (some example include: Swordsage, Hexblade, Duskblade, Warlord, Shaman, Artificer, Incarnate, and Favored Soul).

>>49521727
Disarming attack using the unseen servant's strength mod vs. AC. AC isn't just armor, it's also how likely you are to get hit in the first place in a battle. If you think the wizard is distracted enough, then advantage on the disarming attack.

>>49521682
Depends, is your DM Ed Greenwood?

>>49521727
>what exactly does it mean that it has 1 hp? In the description it says, the servant is shapeless and invisible. So why does it need hit points?

Because it has life, it doesn't necessarily have a will of it's own but magical energy is making it alive therefore it has a hit point. Kinda like the awaken spell on a tree, if you use it the tree gains hp because it is sentient on it's own. Great question though.

>in my game, a PC sent the unseen servant to grab the staff from an enemy wizard. I made the decision, that while the wizard is preoccupied with fighting, he doesn't expect the staff to be grabbed. So I let the PC roll a strength check for the servant (having STR 2, so -4 on check) vs the wizards dexterity. How would you have ruled it?

I would have given him advantage because not only did the wizard not expect it at that point in time but the servant was invisible

>>49521676
I'm going to ignore that a caster is within 5 feet of an enemy and trying to smack it with a longsword that I have no idea how he is proficient in with his at best 14 strength.

If you are looking for a perfect system why even play tabletop where the rules are governed by a person not a closed system. Just play a video game. And why even waste your breath trying to preach to people enjoying a game. Just relax and move on.

>>49521834
I could say the same to you anon. People come asking how to improve the martial experience in a lackluster martial game, and you start preaching telling them to move on to other games.

So why do you care so much?

>>49521858
I care cause I like the game, and having played a ton of Martials I know that some times it feels like they are doing jack shit. But I improved on how I play and using smart decision making and playing to my strengths I don't feel like that anymore.

Seeing people trying to add even more confusing shit to Martials implies that they aren't good, and I like the mental exercises to explain why they are just fine.

So what are you trying to add to Martials to bring them up even further than they are now.

>>49521800
Ed Greenwood doesn't give a shit about Drizzt. Now, if your goal was to kill Mirt the fucking Moneylender or one of Elminster's hot girlfriends, that would be another story.

>>49521994
I already said in the thread anon.

Extra skill proficiencies so they interact in the skill system better than casters.
maneuver dice for everyone but champion fighters. Some of this is permitted to be weaboo fightan magic maneuvers.

>>49521994
People playing martials often forget that they can use their attacks to shove/trip/disarm (DMG) regardless of any maneuvers used.
I have to constantly remind the halberd-wielding polearm master that I DM for that he can trip with the bonus action and THEN hack his prone opponent to bits.

>>49512358

The best part is how the more I do this, the more easily I can do more of it

We killed a treant last knight, but we're in Barovia, so I know the spirit is out there, for a little while.

>Use box of ghosts to get the lumberjack ghosts to find me the spirit of the treant in the forest
>Use Fey Knight vassal to procure the service of a Plant Growth and Speak With Plants
> Use Speak With Plants to propose to the treant to reincarnate him back to life
> Pull out a magic seed from a Dryard whom I have empowered with a blood sacrifice scheme with the orcs
>The seed can turn into a fully grown tree whenever planted into the ground
> Use a combination of a necromantic ritual which I stole from a grieving wizard mother trying to put her daughter into the body of a toddler, only I use the spirit of the treant into the tree and the magic seed, and combine the ritual with the 8 hour version of the plant growth ritual
> have to try it a couple of times because the percentile die isn't with me
>but then it hits

And this is how I made myself a baby treant cohort.

>>49522041
The bonus action from polearm master can't be used to trip/shove, as shove requires the Attack action (and that bonus action attack is not the Attack action).

They can disarm with it, though

>>49522038
Look it's your game and as long as the maneuvers you let them have are subpar to the Battlemaster then it's probably fine. Giving a paladin and rogue and ranger 1 maneuver and a superiority dice would be fine and wouldn't send them spirally out of control.

The magic maneuvers I have personal grievance with cause I have a fighter that knows not a damn thing about magic and it would just feel weird if she just uses the fly maneuver from the martial options Homebrew.

Tossing in an extra skill is kind of iffy but it wouldn't throw everything out the window I don't think.

>>49522103
http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/10/13/6052/

>>49521594
>reroll
Man, I was afraid you'd say something like that, and I don't think they DM might like it, but I don't want to lose the character or that my incompetence leads to PC deads.

File: robinhoodmultishot_5559.jpg (36KB, 350x250px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 350x250px

So my Ranger wanted to do this (though with 2 arrows). I didn't know how to rule it cause he was getting two attacks at once. He was only Level-1.

I googled around and saw that back in 3.5e there was a Feat called Manyshot but it doesn't look like there's an equivalent in 5e.

In the end, I ruled that he could do it but he had to make a Strength check together with his Attack Roll to be able to hold those two arrows before loosing them. Depending whether he failed or succeeded the check, the second arrow would either fly with the second arrow on a success or just fumbles off from his loose and the first arrow just fires as normal (applying if it missed or hit on Attack roll.) Damage rolls apply on successful hits.

I'm new to DMing so I'm wondering if this was the right call? Or is there something in the rulebook I missed out?

>>49522103
>Let me pull some shit out of my ass
Not only you're wrong, you also think you're right which is even worse.

>>49522199
Play your character and just trudge through, if you die you die, just reroll and have a little I told you so moment.

File: 5e official rulings.png (13KB, 376x146px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 376x146px

>>49522134

>>49522200
This is something called flavor, as long as it doesn't give any mechanical advantage it would be fine. He just wants it to look cool as he does it.

File: 5e shoving vs disarming.png (174KB, 352x251px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 352x251px

>>49522213

>>49522200
It's a very generous call. I'd rule that if he gets multiple attacks or uses a feature like Horde Breaker, he can say that he's shooting some of his arrows simultaneously because it's cool.

>>49517466

Don't bother with firebolt.

>>49522200
>I'm wondering if this was the right call?
Imo no, not only 2 ranged attacks for free at first level is pretty strong, he also loses nothing if he fails the str check.

>Or is there something in the rulebook I missed out?
No, if he wants to fire twice he either needs to wait to 5th level, be a fighter and use his action surge or use a hand crossbow with Crossbow Expert feat.

>>49522217
I'll listen to Mearls, a shove still requires opposed athletics it can just fail.

>>49522217
Well it's a good thing it's coming from Sage Advice then.

A better question would be if you can trip on an opportunity attack.

>>49522237
You can shove with any attack, if you have 5 attacks you can try to shove with 5, or disarm, or grapple or any maneuver like that, not just as an ATTACK action

>>49522267
sageadvice.eu is not Sage Advice.

Sage Advice is an official article published by wizards on their website every now and then.

sageadvice.eu is a collection of twitter posts by official wizards employees.

File: 5e opportunity shove.png (14KB, 328x69px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 328x69px

>>49522267
sageadvice.eu is a fan-run site. Sage Advice referenced by that is the Sage Advice Compendium: http://media.wizards.com/2016/downloads/DND/SA-Compendium.pdf

And the answer to your question is no.

>>49522267
No, maneuvers can only be made on your turn, so unless the enemy provokes an AoO on your turn, I don't think so.

>>49522293
Literally read the screenshot, it's right from the PHB. You can shove or grapple as part of the Attack action only.

Disarm doesn't have that caveat, though.

>>49522317
>It's right form the PHB
The PHB has been corrected more than once, I prefer to read what Crawford says.

>>49522317
http://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/06/20/can-you-make-a-shove-or-grapple-with-one-of-your-extra-attack/

Something something check the page he mentions something

>>49522298
>>49522309
That's a fair ruling I guess.

File: makinhalforc[1].jpg (12KB, 250x221px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 250x221px

http://donjon.bin.sh/5e/random/#type=Weird Magic Item

tell me how your character uses it

Staff of Paranoia (Staff, requires attunement by a spellcaster): This staff has 10 charges. While holding it, you can use an action to expend 1 or more of its charges to cast one of the following spells from it, using your spell save DC and spellcasting ability modifier: Detect Poison and Disease (1 charge), Find Traps (2 charges), Glyph of Warding (3 charges), or Death Ward (4 charges). The staff regains 1d6 + 4 expended charges daily at dawn. If you expend the last charge, roll a d20. On a 1, the staff vanishes and joins the conspiracy against you.

She uses it against every Orc to check to see if the skin discoloration is a communicable disease

>>49522237
>If you're able to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this attack replaces one of them

>>49522357
I never said you don't get two shoves with Extra Attack, I was saying that you can't do a shove with the bonus action attack from Polearm Master, or Great Weapon Master, or Two-Weapon Fighting, or any other bonus action attack because it is not the Attack action, responding to >>49522293

>>49522387
Ah, ok, I misunderstood you.

Also, now you can't use bonus action to make shove/grapple? you could before, did they change that in sageadvice again? interesting.

>DM made us roll for magic items for loot
>the Paladin gets the Deck of Many Things
>we are only level 6

So, this is it, huh?

>>49522414
This is D&D though, rerererererere-errating is normal, back in 3.5 TWF/FoB and ImprovedNaturalAttack/Monk'sunarmeddamage working together changed so many times I lose the count

>>49522414
You never could. The bonus action attack from Polearm Master isn't the Attack action--if it was, it would stack with Extra Attack, which would be stupidly cheesy.

>>49522469
That has nothing to do with Extra action. You have only one bonus action, and shoving/grappling could be done with any melee weapon attack, at least it was said by JC in Sageadvice, but it was long ago and it rained a lot since then.

>Catfolks are going to be released before Shifters
Fuck me

https://i.sli.mg/ldOdUM.png
In case someone missed the grandness that was the Hero of the Woods.
(External link because file is too large for 4chan)

>>49522434
He better only have givin you one or two cards.

File: kilogram of steel.jpg (16KB, 700x359px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 700x359px

>>49522494
>your face when this entire conversation
Sorry it's a bit beyond your reading level.

>>49522379
Animated Helmet (Wondrous Item): While wearing this helmet, you can use a bonus action to speak its command word. The helmet leaps into the air and hovers in your space for 1 minute.

My character casts silent image to make their head look like the space behind the head, or in front. Then they speak the command word and pretend to be a dulahan.

>>49522578
It was in the sageadvice, wrote by Crawford, the dude who makes the rules. Sorry if that was beyond your reading level.

>>49522565
what the heck is hero of the woods?

Wait a second. Can't you use GWF and sharpshooter at the same time to get a total of +20 damage for -10 to hit on a heavy crossbow melee attack?

>>49520880
As you are being a both a GWF fighter and a ranger would work out fine if it wasn't for the fact that aside from attribute increases, you also need seperate feats (great weapon fighter, sharpshooter, et cetera).
Probably the best though if you can ask to trade dex for int.

>>49522612
Oh sweet summer child, you are not ready for this.

>>49520983
>>49520962
Tool checks such as glassblowing should really be a few consecutive checks.

3 DC 12 checks are much, much easier for a master than a newbie as the master might only fail on 1-4 and thus has a (16/20)^3 chance of success, whereas a newbie might fail on 1-8 and have (12/20)^3 chance of success.

>>49522670
>heavy crossbow melee attack

>>49522673
Were any of us truly ready?

R8 my Feat, /5eg/
Pratfall
Prereqs: 13+ Cha, Performance skill proficiency
Your extensive practice of the nuances of physical comedy helps you avoid harm.
When you are the target of an attack roll, as long as you are not wearing armor, are not prone, and have a movement speed greater than 0, your AC is equal to 10 + your Dexterity modifier + your proficiency bonus.
In addition, when you roll a natural 1 on a saving throw against an effect that would cause damage, you may choose to make a Performance check against the DC of the original saving throw. On a success, apply damage as though you had succeeded on the original save.

>>49522724
I was, I took part in the campaign.

>>49522724
You can make a melee attack with a heavy crossbow for 1d4 bludgeoning.

It meets the requirements for GWF and Sharpshooter and the 'archery' fighting style.

>>49522762
You know damn well that it's not RAI. But if you want to play a guy who smacks people with a crossbow and your DM allows it, I can't stop you.

>>49522737
I can see this on a swashbuckler rogue, the AC wouldn't kick in until level 8 where you will have 20 Dex and +3 for proficiency, 18 AC. But it eventually gets to 21 total AC. Interesting feat, I would tentatively give a yes, because you need the charisma and the performance proficiency which limits your skill choices. But watch out cause 18 AC is pretty good for someone who can half damage on reaction.

>>49522090

>not using the treant corpse to fabricate a nice bookshelf

I am disgusted

UA next week, likely a new encounter-building system. https://twitter.com/mikemearls/status/768233489137229824

And next month's is going to be a new downtime system to help high-level characters spend money. https://twitter.com/mikemearls/status/780450570196754432

>>49523174
>shitty new zero effort article, probably about rolling dice to be an even lazier DM
trash man.jpg

>>49523239
>Whines about no rules on downtime
>Whines about rules on downtime
This fucking board in a nutshell

>>49523323
I never understood why more people aren't forward porting 3.X rules to 5e, It doesn't take much effort and it'll almost definitely be better than the awful shit found in the UA.

>>49522561
Dude, they already had an Eberron UA

>>49523323
I didn't mean the downtime rules you idiot I meant the encounter building system
Downtime rules sound good

>>49522810
It's as un-RAI as fuck, but it's fair, ridiculous and probably up for grabs in a light-hearted game where you go strength and go around sneak attacking people with a +20 -10 damage heavy crossbow with barely any chance of hitting except on a crit.

File: giphy.gif (3MB, 440x248px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 440x248px

What does /5eg/ think of Aarakocra?

>>49523410
1. They're not official yet
2. They suck so hard it hurts me physically

>make passing mention that there's a trial on-going for a recent convict
>my players suddenly want to ignore the quest to escort this old alchemist to the dig site off town and check it
>one thing led to another and now they're going to defend a person they believe is wrongfully accused

Okay, so my campaign went to Phoenix Wright territory. How do you handle this fundamentally? Do I just forgo skill checks and make it based on pure logic? (Maybe have Passive Perception let them notice details in witnesses when they testify but then I have to worry about Insight spam for lies)

Good god, I'm panicking.

>>49523546
Level 1 fly speed is laughably overpowered. I'd handle it like Raptoran from 3.5, if you remember them: start with immunity to falling damage while conscious and the ability to glide 2 feet laterally for every foot you fall. At level 5 or so, you get a fly speed equal to your land speed.

Otherwise they're no worse than any other wierdo race.

>>49523357
Some of the 3.5 stuff steps on 5e's toes, mainly that some of the classes could probably be better balanced as archetypes, and others don't fit a unique enough niche/role than most everything else in the PHB.

Probably the only thing missing is some form of martial that can deal elemental damage with its melee attacks. And no, I don't mean Way of 4 Elements Monk, because that is a shitty archetype. So far the closest things I've seen get close to it (and seem balanced) are Matt Mercer's Blood Hunter class and some homebrew port of the Duskblade class from 3.5 to 5e.

>>49523569

Give them an insight check equal to their wisdom modifier per day

>>49523594
>Level 1 fly speed is laughably overpowered
Why? it wasn't overpowered in 3.PF and 4e, why is now?

>>49523621
What race got a level 1 fly speed in 3.5? And 4e for that matter?

>>49522737
Basing AC off of the proficiency modifier seems awkward.

The 'if you roll a 1' thing seems awkward in itself, too, being a specific ability that only triggers on a specific roll against specific attacks (saves that reduced deal damage on success) and doesn't really use a reaction when normally those weird things use reactions (such as shield master). Also, triggering on a '1' messes things up for halflings.

The AC would either be an astonishing bonus in niche cases (for wizards/wild sorcerers who don't have armour proficiency, and would thus gain (prof mod) AC from the feat, or (profmod-3) if they use mage armour a lot / dragon sorcerer), take forever to come online (not really too worth it at earlier levels) and at later levels kind of competes with things such as 'resilient'.

I don't know, if someone wants unarmoured defence they can take a level dip or something. Barbarian is a pretty nice level dip for martials.


I think it'd be nicer to see a feat like that used more towards being able to feign death, being able to use your reaction to make an enemy think you've been affected by a save throw ability when you haven't, maybe add something to the 'dodge' action, maybe have something like 'enemies don't have advantage to hit you when you're prone', those sorts of things rather than just making it an unarmoured defence feature.

>>49523357
Because 3.X is miles afar in powerlevels than 5e, unless you only see "name class"="name class" and not that one could lift a castle, jump kms, move at the speed of sound, etc. Is not really portable in 90% of the cases.

>>49523632
I guess Pixie for 4e but it's shitty flying that doesn't get you off the ground as far as I remember. Being Tiny and dicking around in the same space as another creature is what made Pixies broken.

>>49523546
They are fine. Bad DM's have a hard time time dealing with flying PCs. Bad flying PCs have a hard time dealing with the fact they they are delicious flying targets and that they can't fly everywhere they want to.

>>49522860
Thanks.

My thought on uncanny dodge was that it was self-limiting enough: a Rogue potentially has to choose between negating attack damage or getting a second use of his sneak attack. Still, will consider.

>>49523560
So make them stronger. Give them bonuses to everything until they match your perfect furry fap fantasy. Just don't expect us or anyone else to make your disgusting fetish fuel "official"

>>49523632
A few of the later books had them. Races of the Wild and Races of the Dragon off the top of my head, but there's probably a few obscure ones. I have no idea about 4e.

In any case it's OP because it invalidates a huge amount of low level obstacles and monsters. It did in 3.5 too

>>49523569
Assuming this isn't them literally storming into a courtroom and going, "we're adventurers and we want to defend X person," they probably should do some, you know, ACTUAL investigation to see if this guy was wrongly accused to begin with.

Let them do skill checks of the crime scene (Perception to notice tracks, Investigation to find any hidden clues, Survival to track any potential suspects, Persuasion/Intimidation to get information out of someone, Insight to determine if the client is lying or someone else on the stand is lying, Intelligence check to piece together the truth, Arcana to see if anything magical is going on, Religion for any potential evil influences).

Random aside: Wright would totally be a Paladin with Oath of Devotion, and now I want to roleplay that out.

File: warlock.png (735KB, 573x793px) Image search: [Google]

735KB, 573x793px

Playing an undying warlock who drank the blood of a vampire lord to gain his spellcasting and invocations. I just hit level three and I'm having trouble deciding on a pact that's fits from a flavor perspective. What would /tg/ recommend?

>>49523685
>Paladin with Oath of Devotion

You mean, Oath of the Crown....

>>49523569
Make him actually guilty, should be hilarious.

>>49522737
Better specify shields aren't allowed either, because otherwise you're dealing with very high AC caps (unarmored 23 is kind of bonkers).

>>49523632
Crane hengeyokai, Sparrow hengeyokai, Shifter swiftwing as LA +0, sure there're more but these are the only ones I remember

>>49523696

whatever the fuck you want

If you want that familiar, you can get an Igor, if you drank if for spell casting, you want a tome, and if you want to for the vampire battle shit, you want a blade


Just don't pick blade if you don't aim to multiclass into valor bard though, because it's not amazing

>>49523546
Fine if people don't abuse it and DMs compensate.

If someone takes an eldritch spear/sharpshooter aarakokra so they can fly 30ft, let the party hide somewhere and then solo 15 melee enemies in an open field then it might get a bit silly.

As long as the player is playing the race for reasons other than 'I want to find ways to abuse a fast fly speed by picking up enemies and dropping them!' then it's fine.

File: 1467156402880.gif (912KB, 480x340px) Image search: [Google]

912KB, 480x340px

>>49523594
You don't know shit, Clerics used to Ghostwalk as a 5th level spell.

Now that's laughably overpowered beyond all beliefs.

>>49523681
>So make them stronger
That doesn't depend on me, depends on the GM, and 99% of the GMs I've encountered are by the book only even if they allow UA is still what's writen and nothing else, and sorry, but 1+Dex/Str on claws or 1d6+Str AS ACTION is shit.

>>49523569
At least your PCs are on the safe side of the law. My party is getting forced to go to trial while being innocent and are being treated quite badly by everyone. The sessions aren't really fun and the next few ones are going to be miserable for my character.

As for defending that guy, first you'll want to determine IF the guy wants to be defended by characters unfamiliar with local law, or at least not professional in it. He'd need to hire someone as his lawyer if that's what he wanted, and the court might even need to approve it if you want to pretend it's a more formal, licensed job. You'd be better off having him outright refuse stating he has a lawyer, or an appointed state lawyer. The lawyer could go ask them to collect evidence in some formal manner depending on what the case is like. If they fuck it up they could cause the guy to go to jail but ruining his chances of going free.

If it's not a real court system and just some angry villagers going judge dredd on their own people, the PCs can pretty much wing it?

>>49523659
Sorry, your post hadn't loaded yet when I wrote my reply.

I get what you mean. I went with proficiency because I wanted to associate it with a skill rather than simply Charisma, but didn't want to force a check to turn it on.

I don't have any halfling players, so that wasn't a consideration when I wrote it, but yeah; lucky fucks it up or vise versa. Will think about your feedback.

>>49523812
Could make it charismamod+dexmod actually.

Just make sure the other features you get alongside it are applicable enough.

>>49523663
Not classes and things, stuff like downtime rules or crafting

>>49523685

Nah, there were sensible bread crumbs that led to their decision. They did a sit-in in one of the trials and since my knowledge of how court proceedings were, I decided to just utilize how Ace Attorney does court proceedings as zany as it is. After the trial, they tried to speak to the prosecutor but he shooed them off being busy for an upcoming trial. They asked the bailiff what trial it was and bailiff said something about a man who killed his wife in cold blood.

The PCs asked when the trial was which was tomorrow and the Rogue went "Who in their right mind would defend a guy like that?" to fish out a response which the bailiff said "No one wants to take his case. He might have to rely on the state lawyers." Okay, like I said, I have 0 knowledge of civil law shit so I made it that in this city that if a firm won't take the case, the court will appoint a state lawyer to the accused. The PCs then bit the hook and visited the guy in the detention center and took his case.

>>49523769

I did add some flavor that he did not want a lawyer at all and that he is guilty of the crime. The PCs then rolled a successful group check for persuasion which got him to squeeze out that he didn't really remember how it went down and that it just happened so there they are.

The Wizard is the one gonna defend while he has two "Mayas" in form of the other two party members. They're excited as fuck and I'm here writing up a simple murder case story.

>>49523713

That would make a good story, actually.

>>49523738
He means infernal/fey/GOO/whatever
I'd say undying

>>49521675

>Does anyone have a pdf of the Planar Bestiary on DM's Guild they can share?

I'm half tempted to buy this thing just to shut you up.

>>49524086
How much even is it?
Maybe we could have a whip-round, pass the donation plate

One of my players has expressed interesting in learning to DM. I've just run the group through LMoP, and they're starting SKT in a week. Is there a good adventure besides LMoP for first time DMs? I'm looking at the Horde of the Dragon Queen right now, any thoughts?

>>49523870
Makes no sense - the feat isn't about charming your way out of getting hit, it's about using your stage training, which has nothing to do with charisma.

Remember - in 5e, skills aren't locked to specific ability scores. Perform is most commonly used with charisma, but it doesn't have to be.

>>49524005
Don't be silly, he said he was undying already. He definitely means which pact boon.

>there are people who actually run the official campaigns rather than using them as source books for original content.

disgusting desu. baka.

>>49524118
Shit, you're right. Sorry

>University RPSoc
>Everyone is dating (4 couples,1 gay)
>7 players: sometimes split party to take turns getting lunch
>Message cantrip: pass messages via GM
>Month ago Rogue (other PC's gf) takes Arcane Trickster
>We laugh: we have a Wizard, and my gf (Bard) already thiefs better
>Rogue takes Message cantrip
>Now she's always writing messages, passing them over to my gf
>Obviously people concerned; sneaky characters passing messages
>GM pokerface
>During combat, Rogue writes lengthy notes, Bard's turn, she writes equally long responses
>When we're in town, they go to the same places, write notes
>Two weeks ago, at an inn, just got back from a Merchant escort
>Barbarian jokes Rogue was crap in last fight (low rolls) and blames her wasting time learning magic
>Rogue uses Mage Hand to grab the ass of the waitress
>Because it's invisible, she turns around and throws the drinks at the Barb
>Hilarity ensues, Bard steps in, we leave
>Drunk Barb and Rogue have argument outside, Bard tries to diffuse
>Rest of us discuss what party does next/plot
>Barb/Rogue square off to fight
>Rogue passes a message
>GM pokerface
>Barb (GM's gf) reads it, looks at the GM, then Rogue shocked
>GM asks for a con check
>GM explains that as the Barb and Rogue square off,Barb is looking surprisingly weak on her feet
>Messages passed
>Barb says she staggers, rests on her axe, and pleads "Later, please"
>No fight
>We're like: shit, poison is a bit much for PvP
>Rogue, Bard, Barb are now all writing fucking messages
>When the party has to split up the Bard Barb and Rogue always want in same group
>Last session, Bard and Barbarian are praising Rogue doing magic now
>wtf
>See Bard throw paper in trash when we go for lunch
>Say I left my wallet
>Get note from trash:

Graphic description of her response to Rogue using Arcane Trickster's invisible Mage Hand to penetrate her.

>talk to gf at home
The girls have literally been sexting using Arcane Legerdemain as a bonus action every session.

>>49524167
They're great for new DMs and players desu
I'll stop using them when I'm confident...

>>49523696
None of the pact boons scream vampire to me. What does the vampire lord who is your patron do, generally?

>>49524237
>>49523696
Actually, take that back. I'm going to be controversial, and say Pact of the Star Chain is flavorful, if your DM lets you refluff it. It's in the Faithful Unearthed Arcana, if you're interested. It's main features are letting you cast augury as a ritual, and once per short rest, getting advantage on an intelligence check. If you refluff it as some sort of blood ritual, that could be very flavorful, and the abilities fit what I imagine a vampire patron might give.

>>49524237
>>49523696
I'd say either blade (sacrificial knife type thing) or tome (book of secrets type deal)

File: 1315456413.png (2MB, 819x1158px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 819x1158px

>>49524112

Can't go wrong with A Most Potent Brew.

http://www.dmsguild.com/product/186488/A-Most-Potent-Brew--A-Basic-Rules-Adventure

It's another take on the classic "giant rats in my cellar, kill 'em" scenario. It's short, will last a session and it has the fundamentals a newbie DM can learn to run a game. It has everything for a DM to get started. Has four combat encounters, a puzzle, NPC interaction so he can try his hand in roleplaying. There's also enough room for him to personalize the adventure to his own and add between the lines.

That said, I say let him try his hand in LMoP as well since it's also designed to help starter DMs as well. But if he feels like it's too much (or at least you feel like it might be too much to handle for him), go with A Most Potent Brew then follow it with Horror at Havel's Cross (http://www.dmsguild.com/product/191126/Horror-at-Havels-Cross--A-Basic-Rules-Adventure)

I made my brother run these two when he started DMing and it helped loads. Also introduce your DM-hopefuls to "Running the Game" Youtube series in Matt Colville's channel. The entire series is tailor-made for newbie DMs (though there are times he can get rather preachy on social issues.)

File: image.jpg (35KB, 550x336px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 550x336px

>>49524230

>>49524167

>used a reskinned homebrew Lost Mines for my campaign when players suddenly decide to travel a region beyond the scope I've planned
>players did not realize it yet and they've played Lost Mines

I think they will when they reach NotThundertree. Any day now. Yep.

File: WarNeverChanges.png (58KB, 419x427px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 419x427px

>>49524230
What am I reaading

>>49517964
Bumping this request, I think it might have actually been for 4e or 3.5, but I'd still like to get a look at it.
It was mostly tables of basic damage bonuses and minor enchantments, like emanating light or something.
Something similar would be just as helpful, though.

>>49524167
>shitting on Curse of Strahd and Out of the Abyss
Tailoring an adventure for the group is a must, but WotC has published some great adventures in the past couple of years.

It helps that it's also the focus of their business.

>>49524490
Mage Hand is a girl's best friend.

How long until we get word on the next published adventure? I just hopped on the 5e train last month so Storm King's Thunder is the one I'm seeing around.

>>49524686
>OotA
Sure love going back in the underdark for *reasons*

yo /tg/,

so i'm making a fighter sub-class based on mounted archery and i've managed to create a list of possible mounts that range from CR 1/8 to CR 6. They range from Medium (for our halfling and gnome friends) to Huge. I've sorted the different mounts according to terrain type so they have access to interesting mounts depending on where they are.

As the character levels up, they can get mounts of a higher CR and they do so in a manner similar to the revised ranger system - 8 hours and some GP.

Now my question is that some of these mounts have a fly speed. At which level can I safely give PCs a flying mount?

>>49524730
My guess is a December or January announcement, with an April release (going off the "Labyrinth" listing on Amazon).

>>49524789
My bet is a return to Undermountain. Labyrinthine, they brought back Halaster in the D&D Open and they haven't gone back to it yet as a campaign.

>>49524776
Personally I'd say 3-5 especially considering there needs to be room for the mount
Compare it to the levels you might get a broom of flying or similar

>>49521609
Paizo's adventures seem to be better written and thought out from what I've seen. They tend to add a lot more explanation to why a monster exists and what it is doing even going so far with the granularity of adding names and family ties to encounters. That said though I've also noticed their adventures can get extremely dark and uncomfortable, there was an entire section where I just had to stop reading the descriptions in RoTR because it was gruesome and disgusting such that my players asked me to stop.

The wizard's ones that I've played for 5e have so far been really basic, the modules only seem to focus on railroaded content and it doesn't do much for helping build the setting. I guess you could say that they are more open to allow for GM improv which is nice but it still feels like its lacking in any lore.

Take HoTDQ for example, you visit a ton of really big name locations in the first few chapters but the information you get is either non-existant or really small. I've actually resorted to asking my lore-buff player about certain locations because the module has nothing but some NPC names for the railroaded adventure and the fluff surrounding the NPCs is pretty much fuck all.

>>49524829

Huh, okay. Initially I was thinking around level 5 but then thought that would be too early. Just checked the broom of flying and it's only an uncommon item so that's interesting.

>>49524893
Using HotDQ as an example of all 5e adventures is a bit off-point, since all the rest have been better in quality and more focused on open, sandbox-style adventures. HotDQ's railroading and lack of detail are two of the largest complaints about it that you don't see talked about regarding the other 5e modules.

>>49524893
>getting uncomfortable at a description in a paizo module of all things

Please, tell me more!

>>49524938
Yeah, I've only run Phandelver and HoTDQ so far and I am aware that HoTDQ is largely considered the worst (which I agree with given that horrible opening).

I'd read the others but I don't want to read them and then have some miracle happen where someone else other than me wants to run a module.

Still I prefer the formatting of Paizo's modules though, the way they denote encounters is much more readable than the 5e modules.

>>49524980
There is a section with ogres in RoTR where they basically were mutilating corpses and the book gives very graphic depictions of how disgusting and horrible it is. In hindsight that might seem a bit silly but I remember it being a situation of "Why do you even need to say this." kind of deal and hell if my players are going to tell me to stop then Im gonna stop.

>>49522200
I play a ranger and I did this with horde breaker, something your player should look into as >>49522245 said.

Until they get it, they can as >>49522233
says, just have it as rule of cool but you should let them know that because they're still a rookie it's just slightly less efficent as using one arrow as in reality being relatively normal at their stage causes each arrow to just hit for less damage individually, more or less combining to deal as much damage as the singular arrow. If they try to use this to hit multiple targets don't let them of course.

>>49522379
>makinhalforc[1]
post more faggot

File: having a bad time.png (128KB, 438x254px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 438x254px

>>49525048
Fair enough. Some of my longest running players joined my game while I was running Death Love Doom which is legitimately horrific body horror (animate foetus dragging its screaming mother around by the umbilical cord and shit), so they're sort of inured to grim descriptions.

>>49524928
Yeah most people forget about the Broom for some reason

>>49524893
New ones are way better
You should give SKT a read

>>49525168
Refer to my other comment >>49525048

I've got my eye on that one as likely the next module I'd run but Im not gonna ruin the potential of being a player (because god I'd love to play a game past the first few sessions) in the future.

So my table is full of newbies and they've been enjoying a lot of Lost Mines of Phandelver. A lot of them are intrigued of the Faerun and we've all decided that we should tackle the 5e published content when we're done with Lost Mines.

What's good for freshly new level-5 players who are wide-eyed to the world of DnD to tackle? I'm reaaaally leaning towards Strahd cause I wanna introduce to them wonderful world of Ravenloft and the despair it brings forth but at the same time, I heard really great things about Out of the Abyss and Storm King's Thunder. One of my players want to do Tyranny of Dragons line but personally, having DM'd that for another table last year, I really don't want to deal with that module again. That said, if they all agree to do Tyranny of Dragons, I'll have to comply to the players' wants for this one.

Anyone else likes that Undying light is not an EB spammer?

>>49525048
Honestly HotDQ's opening scene is ok so long as you just cut out the blue Dragon part. Think about it: some cult raids a town and starts burning shit, PCs roll in to stop it, here comes the Dragon mask wearing dude who is the leader of this raid party, duels a PC and then leaves after bodying them with the rest of the remaining raiders.

It lets the PCs feel useful, show a threat and encourages them to chase after the dude for a mixture of justice and revenge.

>>49525220
LMoP into SKT is a solid plan, and is one of the suggested examples for starting off SKT.

>>49525311
Has anyone made a "fixed" HotDQ yet?

>>49525346
I think so, there's errata for it, along with a blog someone did where they went through HotDQ and rebalanced a lot and fixed a couple other things.

File: 1437514907605s.jpg (8KB, 245x250px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 245x250px

I've only just noticed that the Spell Points variant only increases your pool in line with regular vancian casters until you get 6th level spells, and then your progression slows, and you can only cast one of each higher level spell a day.
Would I be correct in reading into this as being a buff for casters until 11th level (since it's the same number of spells possible, but also the opportunity to split them differently and maximize either high or low level spam) but afterwards has the drawback of restricting those high level spells?

>>49525435
Pretty much

>>49525459
I'm considering it for use in a game, because it makes more sense with the setting's magic, so even though I'd somewhat like to just open it up to Warlocks and Sorcerers to give them a bit of flexibility and spice, it'd make sense in the setting for all casters to have it.
Should any nerfs be placed on other casters with it? As is, I don't like the sound of giving wizards and clerics even more flexibility and utility in their problem solving.

>>49525385
Hack & Slash?

>>49525220
Storm King's Thunder. Doing that with my newbie players.
They've just finished the Redbrand hideout, I'm excited already.

>>49524112
HotDQ is baaaad.
Worst 5e adventure.

>>49525503
The spell points variant isn't for warlocks, even when you use the system their pact magic stays the same because of how they're meant to scale.

>>49525668
It's not like it would be hard to adapt it for them, and I think that if anyone could benefit from flexibility and possibly casting extra spells it's them.

>>49525618

How did your players deal with Redbrand hideout?

Mine disguised through it and even fooled Glasstaff by busting in as Redbrands and going "MASTER GLASSTAFF THERE ARE INTRUDERS! WE ARE HERE TO ESCORT YOU OUT!" and dragged his ass out of the hideout until Glasstaff realized what the fuck is going on and before he knew it, he was in front of Sildar. Funny shit, they also forgot the letter in the study but hey, Sildar's face was enough for them to go "Oh shit, it's Iarno.. They are so ecstatic since they're so used to video game limitations the fact they went through an entire dungeon doing something they chose and seeing their plans go through is making them have tons of fun and creativity.

>>49525764
They bluffed their way through after managing to fool some guys that they're new recruits and got red cloaks.
However they spent a really long time in the wizard's lab arguing outside Glasstaff's door, one of them even talking to the rat, so Glasstaff escaped.
They did something similar at Cragmaw Cave, they seem to be really enjoying the freedom of approach.

Anyone know anything interesting to replace the twig blights in Thundertree?
I think they're super boring and can't see my players thinking differently.

>>49519361
Watch Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell on netflix. Then do a bit of research on the Masque of the Red Death variant of the old Ravenloft campaign setting. Those give you an idea of what happens when you suddenly have legit wizards walking the earth. Since they are more powerful than anyone, by fefault, some will want to spread their knowledge, and others want to contain it.

I had a similar idea as yours, anon. It was the shockwaves of heavy artillery that awakened the faeries from their slumber, and brought them to the surface.

New Thread
>>49526028
>>49526028
>>49526028

>>49525870

Can't go wrong with a Gelatinous Cube.

>>49526050
Problem is there's like a million of them and that'd be weird

>>49524757
>he doesn't think several encounters with demon lords are reason enough
One weak point on a module is easy to fix

>>49525764
My players cornered Glasstaff and he fed them an elaborate string of lies about being undercover for the Lord's alliance and they believed him and let him go free.

[Spoiler]The other shocking moment we had with that module is when our bard convinced Sildar to come to the final dungeon, where he got sliced in half by a spectator eye beam crit.

>>49525549
I honestly don't remember, I read through a bit of it and didn't agree with some of the design choices the person did (focusing more on fixing the second half of the adventure and not the first half).