/5eg/ D&D 5th Edition General

4e was pretty good.

>>49738978
Last game I DM'd was based in a country based largely on the Byzantine Empire, so technically European but still not what most people think of. But then the players travelled far and wide, including an extended stay in not!Scanjapandinavia.

>>49738978
I ran one that ended a few months back, based slightly on Isle of Dread.

>When was the last time you played in/ran a game that was based on a non-European setting?

When was the last time you played in/ran a game that wasn't based on a Germanified England?

Even Celtic Britain settings are non-existent theses days.

>>49738978
Current game is Underdark so they are turning over Kobold Shantytowns looking for Soul Crystals or whatever.

Unless Kobold Caves is European.

>>49738978
My current homebrew setting is based loosely on 3 rough cultures (orcish Steppe Nomads, gnollish Celtic-Druids and sahuagin with a Grecian theme) set on an island half the size of the U.S. with the rough biodiversity of Cuba / Argentina.

>>49739089
Obviously not, but your characters probably all are.

>>49738978
Curse of Strahd was my first distinctly European game I have ever DMed.

>>>49738978
>When was the last time you played in/ran a game that was based on a non-European setting?

Ha jokes on you op I have never played a game

Feels bad man :'(

Working on 5.4e. what features of forth would you like to see?

>>49739113
Two Dragonborns and a Gioliath.

>>49739239
Powers
Shifting movement
Monster Archetypes

>>49739239
Clear, concise and direct wording.

File: zoidberg.jpg (86KB, 625x464px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 625x464px

>>49739239
Nothing that isn't already there...

>>49739239
Meme based warfare

>>49739239
Patch in both the Awoo and the Catgirl races.

>>49739239
Tactical combat
Clear wording
Clear class roles
Unique class powers, no fucking shared spell lists
Saves/Defenses back to 4e style (3 defenses that are determined by the better of 2 stats).
Limited healing

>>49739239
Also, I (>>49739449) wouldn't mind collaborating on this. Want to make a new thread?

>>49739239
The possibility of making a martial who works around counters

>>49739449
>Tactical combat
I don't think that's necessary for D&D. 4e combats took forever.
>Clear wording
lolwut
>Clear class roles
I disagree. 4e was the only edition to have them and it made party compositions very rigid.
>No shared spell lists
Yes, it's awful how both clerics and wizards can cast light.
>Defenses
Was actually pretty fun. Wouldn't mind going back to 3 saves but have 2 stats tied to each.
>Limited healing
What do you mean by this? Fewer 5e classes can heal, but those that do heal more than in 4e.
Honestly it seems to me like you just like 4e. Nothing wrong with that, but you don't have to change 5e - just play 4e instead.

>>49739465
Sure. I'm stuck on my phone right now, bit lets open it up to tg.

>>49739449
>no fucking shared spell lists
To each their own, I guess. I wouldn't be interested in a system with absolutely no overlap, though. I think each class should be unique, to a degree, but not to the point where its entirely dissimilar from any other class. While I hate 4e levels of sameness between classes, I think some degree of similarity should exist.
Some kind of balance between the two extremes.

>>49739239
Rip all the combat style class features out of the classes and make them their own tracks that each class can progress in at different paces.

Alternatively an alphabetical weapon proficiency table where classes rank their affinity for different weapons from A to E, adjusted by racial proficiencies.

>>49739497
>>Clear wording
>lolwut
Clear.

Wording.

Not this fucking "natural language" bullshit.

>>Limited healing
>What do you mean by this?

I mean that healing should take your HDs/Surges again to limit your daily healing, instead of the gallons of healing potions being the limit on your HP.

>>49739516
You call 4e both "too dissimilar" (as it had unique spell lists for everyone) and "too samey" in the same paragraph. I find this amusing.

>>49739547
I tentatively disagree with your second suggestion (maybe; I need to think more), but I appreciate that you're bringing in fresh ideas that aren't memes. This could be at least interesting to discuss.
How would you suggest these affinities affect accuracy/damage?

>>49739569
You'll never take my "totally balanced" Vitality Bard away!

>>49739590
Honestly, I'm okay with bards being the strongest class. They deserve their few years in the spotlight after being such overshadowed buttmonkeys in 3e and 4e.

>>49739612
>bard
>overshadowed
>4e
Nigga

>>49739612
In 4e they're in the running for best leader. In 3.x they're a solid mid-tier class. In AD&D they were the fucking Homo Superior. They've never been butt monkeys.

>>49739573
Alternating damage and accuracy bonuses/penalties for ranks above or below C.

+1 damage and hit for A
+1 hit for B
C is baseline
-1 hit for D
-1 damage and hit for E

Maybe add S and F to represent a something like a Longsword weapon master wielding a longsword, or an Elf fighter using a racial weapon, or a wizard trying to use a greataxe, or a medium character trying to use a large weapon.

Also weapon specific actions maybe?

>>49739569
>You call 4e both "too dissimilar"
Never did I say any such thing. In fact, my opinion of 4e is the exact opposite of that. I think you need to reread my reply, carefully. I was saying that the person I was replying to's suggestion of entirely separate spell lists would make classes to dissimilar, and it would be best to find a balance somewhere in between that extreme, and the opposite extreme of sameness between classes, such as what we've seen in 4e.

>>49739637
>In 3.x they're a solid mid-tier class
I honestly don't think people ever really figured out how to solidly build/play bards in 3.x.

>>49739650
If I wanted to do something with weapon-groups, I'd port the effects of the 4e expertise feats. They actually made weapon choice pretty important in something other than damage.

>>49739668
> I was saying that the person I was replying to's suggestion of entirely separate spell lists would make classes to dissimilar

This
is
what
4e
did

>>49739693
>This is what 4e did
While true, the boiling down of all powers to class abilities that had different flavor, but were still mechanically similar, just called by different names, left every class with a feeling of sameness.

>>49739682
What's to figure out? Whether they're "optimized" or not, 3.x bards are always better than fighters and worse than CoDzillas. Their entire potential range of power falls squarely in between the game's highs and lows.

>>49739693
Honestly I'm just stealing the way weapon proficiencies worked in ffxi because I always liked the dynamic of sometimes switching to a weapon your class wasn't specialized in because you needed a certain weapon property or a particular weapin skill.

File: spells.png (507KB, 914x2248px) Image search: [Google]

507KB, 914x2248px

>>49739727
>but were still mechanically similar, just called by different names,

There were mechanically similar powers to sidestep the whole "entirely different" thing without sharing spell lists.

>>49739768
And it ended up with classes that functioned almost identically, except for what the names of their powers were. Sterile and boring.

>>49739795
I just linked an image. Please feel free to replicate those powers with anything other than what their original class is.

>>49739795
Are we still having this conversation in 2016? Have people never actually thoughtfully examined the differences between classes.

>>49739795
People always say that, but they never offer much in the way of proof.

>>49738978
the fug, playing anything other then 3.5???

>>49739814
While there are certainly exceptions, as I have already admitted with the word "almost," and as you have pointed out, many of these powers are still too generic, in my opinion, to be powers limited to a particular class. (Dice, type) damage is pretty universal to all classes, the only unique factor being the name of the power, as are abilities that force opponents to make a save or suffer a negative effect. Those create wall spells are pretty handy, though, I'll give you that.

>>49739883
>(Dice, type) damage is pretty universal to all classes, the only unique factor being the name of the power

This is ignoring shit like keywords, which defense it's targeting, range/blast, action type etc.

They are also by far the least numerous. Most powers have an on hit effect at the very least, even at-wills.

It also bears mentioning that even when classes share powers, their passives modify them in ways that make them unique.

I.e. a Burst 1 on a barbarian functions entirely differently from a burst 1 on a fighter, even if they are the exact same thing at face value.

>>49739650
Interesting concept. I would definitely switch +1 damage and +1 hit, because to hit is more valuable than damage (except in high-level 3e classes, but those were never balanced anyway).

>>49739744
>Better than fighters
There were NPC classes better than the fighter.
>Worse than CoDzillas
Meaning there's no reason to play them, because CoDzillas overshadow them in every meaningful way. I didn't say bards were weak, just overshadowed because they didn't excel in anything above anybody else.

>>49739826
Better question: are we still having this conversation in /5eg/?

File: Dungeon-World-388x220.jpg (38KB, 388x220px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 388x220px

So what makes D&D 5e so much better than Dungeon World?

File: 54eideas.jpg (174KB, 1216x1052px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 1216x1052px

My thoughts on 5.4e.

Some of these may be contradictory, or huge projects. I'm just brainstorming what I liked about 5e.

>>49740024
They are about the same honestly.

Both are absolutely garbage when compared to a real mans game like Runquest however.

>>49740024
>What makes [the topic of this thread] better than [something unrelated that people need to stop bringing up every other thread]?
Real answer: DW isn't actually much simpler, and lacks a structure for meaningful long-term development.

>>49740024
They are too different to compare.

Honestly, the only thing I think 5e is better at is combat and higher level play, and combat is still boring and high level is a casterfest

>>49740024
Dungeon World has like inter-party attitude rules and "succeed at a cost" like pie in the sky DM fiat attitude.

>>49740043
Theater of mind makes positioning based shenanigans harder.

Removing AoOs also de-emphasizes positioning.

That said, a look at 13th age for a more "structured" ToM play could be worth your time.

>>49740043

> combat should be more complicated than base 5e but also "theater of the mind" faggotry

I can see this game turning out great already.

>>49739239
Reworking maneouvers and superriority dice.

All martials learn maneouvers and gain either Dex mod or Str mod number of superiority dies which recharge on short rest.
They have this progression with superiority dies 1d6->Lvl7=1d8->Lvl 10=1d10->Lvl 15=1d12.

Battlemaster gets extra Con mod+1 superiority dies and has a faster superiority dice progression 1d10 at lvl 7, 1d12 at lvl 10 and 2d8 at lvl 15.

More Wis based casters but make them less restricted (no hippies and Mormons pls).

Slight rework on monks so they can get a +1/+2 bonus on unarmed strikes at later levels.
Maybe take the "Ki enhanced strikes" feature and state on which level they gain the +1/+2/+3 bonus.

>>49740044

Agreed. The tier list goes:

Runequest > D&D 3.5 > Pathfinder > GURPS > Savage Worlds > 4e > Dungeon World > 5e > FantasyCrap > Mouse Guard

really there are not any other fantasy RPGs worth mentioning. I know this'll bring a bunch of angry autistics out of the woodwork to post their particular flavor of heartbreaker, but it's just the truth. I'm sorry if you can't handle it.

>>49740136
>D&D 3.5 higher than Pathfinder
>Either of those higher than 5e
>Dungeon World higher than 5e
>"lol nothing else matters objectively and I know everything"
Troll detected.

>>49740119
>Having to use miniatures for D&D
Fuckin plebs on my board

>>49740044
Lindy pls go

Describe your favorite character you've played in 5e so far?

Describe what you plan to play in 5e in the future?

>>49740217
Mermaid barbarian/rogue who spoke in indecipherable sailor jargon.

>>49740160
Everything is based on ranges, how would you even know where you are or where to go or if you can hit anything with your attacks or spells?

Not using minis in DnD would be like playing a videogame with your eyes closed and your friend telling you when to press the buttons.

File: ____skeptical_girl.png (493KB, 481x541px) Image search: [Google]

493KB, 481x541px

>>49740160
>>49740160

D&D 3.5 is better than Pathfinder. Pathfinder literally added more complexity by forcing rules that most people just ignored before.

House-ruled D&D 3.5 is far objective to 5e, which as good ideas about proficiency and hit-die sizes but then fucks it up with CR-derived proficiency, 2-hit-dice-based orcs, lack of (real) feats, hard caps to force "muh bounded accuracy" and complete lack of situational modifiers, instead forcing advantage/disadvantage crap until there's not even any point to taking cover because it doesn't benefit you in any way.

>>49740160

> not understanding that most combat complexity is rewarded by maneuver-based abilities
> not understanding that theater of the mind combat is fine except in a game that determines spell areas in terms of 40x40 foot cones

Way to miss the entire point of my post.

>>49740217
Mariner Fighter/Swashbuckler/Shadow monk with Observant... etc. Gotta go fast pirate Aquatic Half elf.

If I take the ambuscade ranger as well I might just win the title of munchkin of the year.

>>49739069
My home setting is usually either a weird fantasy colonial america (but more divided between various nations), steppes, or celtic britain (although often a post-arthurian thing where a third of the isles is already germanified)

>>49740136
Wrong, the true list is:

FATAL > Racial Holy War > Maid RPG > Gang Rape > Dungeon World > Zettai Reido > Runequest > Pathfinder > everything else

>>49740074
My problem with aoos had been they stifle movement in my games.

>>49740299
>>49740270
You could do the following:

-When a battle happens, you split up the battlefield into areas that have relative ranges to each other. Not "x feet" but "next to, close" etc.
-ranges are detailed in these increments (including movement)
-number of targets is either a number, or "all" in which case it hits everyone in the area.

>>49740394
Add some defensive movement like 4e shift. AoOs let you control area. Without area control, positioning becomes a bore, not a challenge.

>>49740416
I agree that aoos are necessary. Just that they need to be tweake those are some good suggestions, and i will consider them.

>>49740416
As long as not every AOO stops movements. I'm all for tactics, but the "tank" "forcing" all enemies to attack it is an MMO concept that should never have made it to PnP. One man shouldn't be able to stop 3 or 4 people from moving past him if he's not actually filling up a choke point.

>>49740282
Looking back at 3.pf I cannot abide the adding up of tons of little bonuses or "Skill ranks" or situational tidbits, 5e spoiled me by streamlining the skills and numbers so nicely.

Also feats were such a chore, I can remember trying to look through the whole list of feats and not wanting to bother with any of them.

>>49739239
Warlords. That is all.

>>49740416
It would still end up being Mother May I with the DM letting you use your spells or attack enemies.

>>49740479
Not all of them should, but some should be able to. It is a much more natural method of protecting allies than aggro. If nothing else, 3.5 trip-fighter style (although I massively prefer just "fighter hits you so hard you forget where you were going).

>>49740508
No, the ranges on areas would be set when the fight starts, and so would be the spells.

If your spell/attack is "far" ranged, you can use it to shoot enemies in a "far" area, no fiat needed.

If it's an AoE, and all enemies are in the same are, you hit them all (or as many as your AoE number). There's no fiat.

>>49740534
So now people have to remember where everyone sort of is, maybe how far away they are (in case anyone moves), then the DM might doodle a little diagram to remind people, then he might mark dots or X's where the bad guys are, etc...
Then you might as well have a real map to begin with, it makes all this instantaneous and obvious.

>>49740579
Well, people manage to play 5e ToM already, and this is a simplified version of that.

Admittedly, doodles do help.

Is there a way for a DM to kill a character without making it obvious he was trying to? Like, having every monster focus him is too obvious, and obviously he'll call bullshit on random deadly traps or a DM fiat/plot-related PK.

>>49740608
If we have no room for our grid mat, we still pull out minis and arrange them on whatever space we have, adding in props as necessary. A few months ago we fought in a warehouse, with Arby's sweet&sour sauce cups representing fat stacks of crates.

>>49740623
Roll behind a screen and have an "unfortunate" critical hit which "unfortunately" rolls high on damage.
Alternatively, don't be a faggot and talk with the player if you've got some sort of problem with them.

>>49740623
What's the impetus for killing his character?

Is he a problem? Did you houserule something in and are now too afraid to take it from him?

Wouldn't it be interesting if every fighter could attempt to perform combat maneuvers in the vein of the Battlemaster? You know, tripping or disarming enemies as part of or in place of making an attack. I like the Battlemaster as the Fighter who is a specialist in doing things like that, but I don't like them being the ONLY people who can do things like that. Sure, you can argue that someone can attempt an ability check to trip or disarm someone in battle, but that seems like a lot of improv for something that should have simple, explicit rules for execution and effect.

>>49740661
No impetus, I just wanted to see how quickly I could get people to call me a faggot.

>>49740658

>>49740645
Yeah, this works like that. In a bar fight, you could have like, a single paper with 3-4 circles with lines connecting them labelled for areas ("tables", "bar", "Staircase", "upstairs") and move characters to and from if you really need visual to represent it.

File: 87bff11af380da4b1262cbda896a33b6.jpg (619KB, 1100x1222px) Image search: [Google]

619KB, 1100x1222px

real talk is there some 16+ peeps on here willing to pick up a newby? ill play the bitch character no problem.

>>49740645
>Arby's
I'm so sorry you had to go through that anon.

>>49740704
Try roll20 /r/lfg. I've never heard of anybody getting a group from /5eg/.
We should perhaps put group-finding resources in the OP.

>>49740671
Adding 1 maneuver and 1 d8 superiority dice at level 3 to the other archetype an shouldn't be a big problem. Change it on level up and yeah that's balanced.

If you run a game though see to it that some other classes get buffs cause favoritism.

>>49740671
There are rules for knocking people prone in combat without a maneuver - it's called the shove action. As for disarming, it shouldn't be so common that everyone does it all the time. It's not really something you can reliably do to someone in combat - it's certainly much harder than just slamming into them to knock them over.

>>49740479
The tank has to be able to force some enemies to attack it or he literally can't do his job.

>>49740763
>force some enemies to attack it
That's not a thing. You only think it's a thing because of World of Warcraft.
>can't do his job
Standing in choke points and wearing plate armor doesn't require a "taunt."

>>49740789
What if there isn't a choke point?

>>49740763
He shouldn't be able to force them without the aid of magic, but a 4e-style marking mechanic where they take penalties if they don't include the tank as a target of their attack would be ok.

Make it a bonus action to mark a target when you hit them with a melee attack; the enemy has disadvantage on all attacks that don't include you as a target until the beginning of your next turn. This requires you to keep engaging them to hold their attention, you don't just taunt them and then ignore them.

>>49740789
There might not be a choke point, but it has always been the warrior classes role to prevent enemies from attacking the weaker classes. In the land of 5 foot corridors, this was easy because you simply couldn't get around the fighter in front. In open spaces, it didn't (and doesn't) work at all without some kind of punitive actions or zone control on the part of the warrior.

>>49739612
Bards were always a solid class, it's just that people with easily bruised masculinites didn't take well to the idea of traveling with a musician or a poet (their loss, music students throw the best parties, and before someone whines about the characterization, almost every complaint I've seen was how faggy it was as a concept).

In 3.5, people who thought bard was underpowered were either playing games where everyone rolled the monster trinity (Wizard, Druid, Cleric) or had the same kind of mentality that dictated that fighter and barb were better warrior classes than ranger and paladin when it was generally the opposite. If Bard had had find traps in 2e and 3.5, nobody would have rolled thief (even moreso in 2e where a Bard will be level 16 by the time a Wizard has level 6 spells at all).

>>49740763
You're defining party roles in terms of how MMOs work. Only in that context is it a close-combat soldier's "job" to magically compel enemies to attack him when more preferable targets are also available.

>>49740879
MMOs took that from D&D.

Fighting men protected Magic Users since time immemoriam.

>>49740805
If there isn't a choke point, you close ranks around the squishies. Take some cues from real life instead of giving swordsmen magical compulsion powers.

>>49740842
As above, except respectfully. Unfortunately, you can't expect even the heavily-armored dude to always fulfill the exact same role, certainly not if you're advocating for tactical combat (which requires diversity to be fun).

>>49740815
Absolutely, I thought marking was brilliant. You can't force people to do anything, but you can definitely get all up in their business.

>>49740763
I thought the "tank" was supposed to be named after a thing that's hard to kill and has very thick armor. If drawing aggro was its job, why isn't the role called "flag bearer" or "asshole".

File: 91a525391a7c04f911149684090a9b48.png (299KB, 553x321px) Image search: [Google]

299KB, 553x321px

>>49740671
>>49740732
from the DMG

>>49740895
[citation needed]
"Taunting" has never been a core mechanic in D&D, ever. Yes, armored dudes should protect squishy dudes, but they should do it with careful positioning and tactics. The idea of aggro and magical compulsions to fight one person are a video game thing.

>>49740479
Taunt as an ability predates MMOs and was already a thing with one UA class in 1e, and existed in 2e as a kit ability for a few kits

>>49740967
This is not taunting. This is keeping enemies at bay. Nobody is taunting.

>>49740895
You're talking completely out of your ass. No edition of D&D had tank-mind-control before they borrowed it from MMOs late in 3.5's lifespan with the Knight class.

Old editions of D&D tried to be more like a simulation (though they often failed.) DMs were encouraged to roleplay monsters according to their natural instincts or Intelligence scores rather than have them all act like mindless mobs who made a beeline for whoever was drawing the most aggro. If you wanted to force an enemy to attack you against its own will, you needed to cast a charm spell at it. Otherwise it would keep on doing whatever seemed best for it at the time.

>>49740942
Because that's just the nomenclature.

>>49740895
This is true. That was the warrior classes role.

>>49740967
>careful positioning and tactics.
5 ft corridors did all that for you. In open spaces, non-warrior classes were exposed and frequently died.

>>49740981
Nobody is really calling for charm spells. Marking is an excellent solution to the problem, though it has been severely nerfed between editions.

>>49740976
I'm not sure you're contradicting me? I'm the one saying taunting shouldn't be a thing.

>>49740970
I'll have to believe you about 1e, because I've only played since 2e. Either way it's not a core mechanic that should be prevalent in all fights, but rather a niche thing to be accomplished by rare characters.
Incidentally, I have all the 2e supplements on the shelf next to me; could you point me towards the kits with taunts? I'd like to take a look at them.

>>49740987
>Open spaces etc.
You're saying that like it's a bad thing. Older editions were more about dungeon delves than outdoors combat anyway, and the reason people died is they adjusted to outdoors fighting poorly (e.g. not forming a protective circle around the wizard).

File: 1425660899194.jpg (21KB, 400x399px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 400x399px

homebrewers out there:

how would you rebalance true strike? i like the concept of the ability, but it is pretty awful. i want to play a divination wizard with the 'blind omen seer' sort of vibe, and would love to have this be a signature ability of sorts. what do you think?

maybe confer advantage to ANYONE, but only the first person to hit?

>>49741015
Forming a circle around the wizard only worked if you had multiple warrior classes, and only if those were hardy warrior classes as well, like fighters, paladins, and cavaliers. Rangers and Barbarians were not very effective walls, and the odds that you had 3+ warriors in a single party was rare. Clerics could sometimes close the gap, but that's not really what they were best at.

>>49741015
>I'm not sure you're contradicting me? I'm the one saying taunting shouldn't be a thing.

And I'm saying marking isn't a taunt mechanic, nor is being able to stop enemies from moving by hitting them in the legs.

What is this nonsense even about? The Sentinel Feat in Core, the Goading Attack in Battlemaster, and the Marking in the DMG already acknowledge that these are acceptable effects in 5th edition. Defending characters should absolutely use these things, since they are designed to make your role possible. What's the problem?

>>49741010
You weren't paying attention. I'm saying that charm spells at least make sense because they're a thing happening in-game. Marking is a completely abstract concept that only exists out-of-game but somehow influences the behavior of NPCs. It's a clunky attempt to make tabletop more like an MMO without having to track each monster's aggro toward each individual PC.

>>49741115
What? Marking is a thing in sports even, let alone actual warfare.

>>49741115
>Marking is a completely abstract concept that only exists out-of-game but somehow influences the behavior of NPCs.

Marking gives you an AoO and makes attacking others harder. Where the fuck is the mind control you dense motherfucker?

>>49741021
For your character I would allow a 30 foot range to an ally. Do you want it like a viable pick compared to firebolt?

>>49741115
I didn't know this was a chuckleposting thread now

Quality stuff, anon-chan XD

>>49741046
Older editions typically advocated for parties of around 6, with only one representative each of the non-warrior groups. Rangers were perfectly capable of being a wall, having higher hit points by far than wizards and being able to use shields in a pinch. Barbarians weren't a thing except in supplements. And clerics had relatively high health and plate armor (and shields), so they were just as serviceable as most fighters.

>>49741115
When we're talking about "charm spells," we're referring to taunts, and how warriors shouldn't be able to replicate magical effects (unless, of course, they were casting spells) just to "fulfill their role better." Also, see >>49741144.

>>49741108
Goading attack is basically a form of marking - you're not forcing anything, just giving disadvantage to attacks against others. Sentinel is fine because it can't be abused by one person to hold off an army.
The nonsense is about people wanting MMO-style "taunts" on their "tanks," and others arguing it's not a good mechanic.

>>49741161

essentially yes. i want it to be a viable way to fill in an action with a cantrip for the early levels in a unique and interesting way. especially because i would like the pc to trend more towards control and buffing rather than pure damage.

>>49740282
Ignoring the hot opinions here, cover gives a flat AC bonus depending on how significant it is. Off the top of my head it's one of the few situational bonuses in the game that isn't magic

>>49741211
The first mention of taunt was >>49740789

"Forcing them to attack the tank" doesn't mean hard control (i.e. dominate) it can mean soft control (i.e. marking).

You (assuming I got your posts right) have been overreacting and throwing a tantrum because you immediately associated stuff with MMO mechanics.

>>49741283
>FORCE enemies to attack
No, that means hard control. Marking forces nothing. I think you're underreacting, anon-kun.

>>49741151
The part where that stuff happens for no apparent reason except to make it more like an MMO.

You can argue that it's not healthy to not guard yourself against a fighter who's all up in your grillpiece, but note that the same thing is not true of rogues, a class that actually specializes in attacking enemies who have their guard down. I can have a rogue up in my grillpiece all day and not suffer any special penalties. Why does the fighter get this nonsensical ability? Because it's more like an MMO.

>>49741312
It's the opposite effect, friend. Marking doesn't make it easier to attack; it makes it harder for somebody else to, by getting all up in their grillpiece. Rogues don't do that because they'd rather avoid notice until they strike.

>>49741312
Really? Fighers should have sneak attack then, since they should be able to target unguarded vitals like rogues. All martials should be one class that can do everything, realistically, everything different from some otherclass's ability is just MMO bullshit.

>>49741243
Well then you are gonna need concentration free.

15 Foot Range, as an action you target an ally and an enemy. That ally gains half your Proficiency bonus to attack rolls and saving throws against the targeted enemy.

At level 5 you may target an additional enemy or ally. At level 11 target 2 additional allies or enemies, or split up this number to give to 2 enemies and 2 allies total. At 17th level you may target 3 additional creatures for this effect.

Kind of clunky but it's not overpowered.

>>49741021
>how would you rebalance true strike
Give it a range of 30 feet and let you apply it to an ally's attack, that way it becomes the ranged equivalent of the Help action.

>>49741364
I like it! I'll try to play with the numbers to see if the proficiency bonus thing works out well.

>>49741450
An idea is make it full proficiency but lose the saving throw bonus. It felt immersive to you helping them but +3 to attack at level 19 is meh.

>>49741021
Make its effect better but make it not a cantrip. Seriously, even just making it 1st or 2nd level opens up its potential so much.

The benefit really should not be transferable to another character, though. Wizards get more than enough support spells already for a class that's not primarily about support. True Strike should stick to its roots and be about hitting things personally rather than helping somebody else hit things.

>>49739239
Better marking, warlords >>49739439 this guy's idea, superiority dice recharge every 10 minutes.

If you could nerf wild shape, that would be cool

>>49741344
It's not exactly rocket science to get awkwardly close to someone.

>>49739439
There was an awoo race?

>>49741644
Someone made and posted it a few threads ago

>>49741661
Tell me it isn't waifushit. I've always wanted to be a big, ripped wolfman.

hey /tg/, i am new to 5th and i have been looking through the players handbook. i look at wizards and sorcerers and i don't really see that much of a difference. can someone explain the pros and cons because i just cant wrap my head around it.

>>49741791
Wizards are more flexible, have more spells, and have schools and use INT to cast spells.

Sorcerers are slightly tankier, and have metamagic which is good for a few tricks.

>>49741791
Wizards get a ton of spells to be prepared for any situation. They learn spells through hard study.

Sorcerers get fewer spells but can augment them with metamagic. They get spells from innate magical abilities.

File: yellow square red blood.png (517KB, 853x471px) Image search: [Google]

517KB, 853x471px

>>49738978
>When was the last time you played in/ran a game that was based on a non-European setting?


last month, it was pretty much Undertale 1:1

>>49741819
what makes them tankier?

>>49741791
Wizards are smart, scholarly gentlemen who have to work hard to use magic and can learn as many spells as their spellbooks can hold.

Sorcerers have some kind of magical ancestry that lets them use magic without working a day in their lives, with high charisma so women are attracted to them. They're magical Chads so they don't know as many spells but can do it more times per day.

>>49741859
Constitution saves

>>49741879
>They're magical Chads so they don't know as many spells but can do it more times per day.

They can't though. Pretty sure wizards have more spells/day.

>>49741880
Also, since wild bloodline is so shit, dragon gives bonus hp as well.

WotC added another stealth update to the VGtM page, from chapter 1. Seems they're introducing specific personality stuff for the various classic monsters. http://media.wizards.com/2016/dnd/downloads/Volo_GiantsLore.pdf

>>49741598
Positioning and stancing yourself to intercept weapon strikes, however, is something that needs to be learned. If your weapon training focuses on anatomy and vulnerable points rather than fencing, it makes sense to deal high damage but not mark.

>>49741879
More spells per day is a 3e thing. Sorcerers no longer have that, because all casters follow the same slot progression.

>>49741661
>>49741775
please

>>49740024
No dragons in Dungeon World.

I'm playing a Battle Master but I run out of dice too quick. Is there a good way to make it so that I can have at least one per fight before level 15?

>>49742145
I didn't read it, look back through the threads if you care

>>49742221
a) don't use a die every attack
b) take more short rests
c) talk to your DM

>>49742221
Take the feat but don't change your rate of usage, you'll always have at least one

>>49741951
I'm legitimately confused as to why VGtM is getting so much hype, so far it's literally just character races nobody ever plays and more shit that should've been in the monster manual.... for $50.

>>49742278
Elminster snark carries a premium

Is Parry or Riposte a better Maneuver if I'm AC 16 (and will probably stay there for a while)?

>>49742278
It's character races and about 100 new monster stat blocks, on top of the provided lore (and, from the look of the preview, good resources for DMs looking to spice up existing monsters).

>>49742285
That depends entirely on your party composition and who else can take a hit or heal. If your party is durable enough, take Riposte for damage. If you need to be taking and avoiding hits, go Parry.

>>49742306
>so far it's literally just character races nobody ever plays
>It's character races
>and more shit that should've been in the monster manual
>and about 100 new monster stat blocks
Everything feels to check out.

Watery Sphere is highest damage spell in game at 31344 cold damage

>>49742233
That's not helpful.

File: Capture.png (225KB, 523x751px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 523x751px

Be honest, would you play on this map?

>>49742568
What a small place.

>>49742568
>England

>>49742568
>>49742592
Anon, please. Scotland's right there and you're hurting its feelings.

>>49741951
Got the rest? Please?

>>49742684
are you retarded?

>>49742568
Sure, better than the MS Paint scribbles I make.

File: 1473987066779.png (5KB, 306x290px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 306x290px

>>49742584
>>49742592
I'll do better next time

>>49742568
Yeah, most maps in games I've played in are just inkarnate maps or ms paint atrocities.

File: goblins.jpg (133KB, 640x396px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 640x396px

I'm running a short side session for my LMoP group as one of them can't make the game this week.

They recently took over Cragmaw Cave and sent some of the remaining goblins to investigate and give them intel on Cragmaw Castle while they left town to do a bunch of shit (basically the rest of chapter 3).

I thought it'd be fun to have them control the goblins as they investigate.

Does anyone have any fun interactions or hijinx that said goblins coulg get into?

>>49742324
>I don't play these races so no one does!
>More monsters? Why can't they just make the monster manual 900 pages on the first go with every conceivable monster? So greedy!

>>49742959
it's pretty cute, depending on the game id like it or find it restrictive. trust yourself.

I don't even make maps because places only exist about two minutes before my players get there. improv ruined me

>>49743256
I don't but please post about this after the fact, this is delightful and I'm going to steal it sometime.

>>49739239
I enjoy 13th age's? Threat die. A counter that tracts the number of rounds in an combat and adds that number to all damage. Makes combat that drags on to long deadly and faster.

>>49739973
I second this post.

A basic attack from a fighter and Barbadian are far more "samey" in 3.5 & 5th than in 4th

Are the following encounters too silly, /5eg/?

>One Kobold carries a bladder of oil, another carries two torches. The other two carry spears. The spearmen rush in, one Kobold tries to splash oil on the party, the other Kobold throws torches. Friendly fire is not a concept they understand, and this is an unwieldy system at best.
>1d4 Kobolds inside a giant metal dome of tied together plates, armor, and pans. They try to stab at foes with spears, and try to kick through the holes of the dome. Moves very slowly, has a hideously high AC, can be lead off of stairs or into a pit.
>1d4 Kobolds running with torches in their hands and a barrel of explosives on their backs. They light themselves up and explode when they’re in melee range. Put out the torches or kill them to stop them from exploding and inflicting heavy damage. Kobold will feel awkward and give party the barrel before slinking away in shame if extinguished.
>Two Kobold swordsmen, and two wielding a spider attached to a stick. Spiderstick is a bludgeoning weapon, and the spider will predictably bite anything it hits. Spiderstick lasts 1d3 hits before the spider dies or falls off and skitters away. Spiderstick deals 1d4 damage + Bite (Giant Spider bite with a 1d4 instead of 1d8).
>Two Kobolds stacked on top of each other and harnessed together, one with a crossbow, the other with a sword. Pretends to be an Orc (and statted like an Orc) with a Crossbow shooting from its crotch area. At half health, one dies and the other tumbles down, stunned for one round as it tries to pry itself out of its harness

>>49743256
Yeah they betray the PCs and ambush them with hobgoblins and the owlbear

>>49743745
My group would love them. I'm more lukewarm towards them being a more serious DM but i've definitely run games where they would fit right in.

>>49743819
Alright. I've basically set up two kinds of kobolds, the 'stupid' kind I'm showing off here, and Tucker's kobolds. I'm trying to go for a funny kind of grimdark, but with an emphasis on legitimately threatening encounters later on.

The idea is that the party gets used to the self-destructive little idiots in the first half of the dungeon (ending with an encounter featuring an injured Chuul that has a chance of going after its Kobold jailers when it's released on the party), and then they'll get thrown for a loop when they meet kobolds that circle around and try to isolate individual party members, Kobolds in the walls that activate traps and poke at them with spears through holes in the wall, perform shield walls and flank, and sneaky kobolds that creep up on the party, unload a flintlock/crossbow/shitty magic wand, and then run.

>>49743745
No, they're pretty great. I'm fairly serious as a DM and even I might use them occasionally because they actually feel like something kobolds would try - inventive and kind of dumb all at the same time. Science!

>>49744080
Thanks!

But, because of guilt, I might as well point out where I largely stole all of them from.

http://goblinpunch.blogspot.com/

Fun stuff, this guy lead me to build my own campaign in the first place.

>>49744121
You do your family honor by acknowledging the source of the encounters, especially since you never claimed to create them in the first place. Peace by upon you, anon.

>>49744121
Oh I remember that website!

Thats where the false hydra lives!

>>49743345
>$50 for 200 pages
Golly gee this tots doesn't remind me of Palladium

If druids got a new archetype what would you like them to have?

>>49744492
A reason not to wildshape.

But in all seriousness, I wish land druids were more enticing

>>49744492
Our group is currently running a druid using the Beastmaster Archtype from Nu-Ranger. Seems to be working fine.

Perhaps a Healer Drood, Mushroom Drood or a Necromancer Drood, because so far "Better Wildshape" and "Better Magic" kind of cover everything you can say about Druids.

>>49744492
Bird Maiden

How do you nerf Wild Shape?

>>49742221
I personally save all my battlemaster dice for one turn, then tend to spunk the lot.

Hand Crossbow wielding Sharpshooter, usually I just sit by content until we get against a caster or boss and then I kill them in one round.

>>49744565
Not give the druid 80 temp hp every time it's used?

>>49744565
Make it a Long-rest resource.

>>49744492
It's hard to really think of something to focus on for druids outside of wildshape or expanded magic. Defilers seem like an obvious direction, but they're pretty much just pure villain material for practical reasons.
It's easy to think of some gimmick like "this archetype has were-creature wildshapes instead" or something like that, but that wouldn't really feel different. Maybe some sort of beastmaster thing would work (but it would probably either be weaker or have to give up something to really make that not feel OP. Also it just feels kind of cheap to just outright copy another class like that)
I guess what I'm saying is I just wouldn't make a new one if I could help it

>>49744565
I made it so that if they are forced back into their normal form via damage they gain a level of exhaustion.

>>49744565
They take damage if their buffer HP is depleted or something

>>49743745
Silliest kobold encounter I had was the party opened a side door to a room containing several kobolds they all looked surprised and slack jawed. One of them said to the party "This is a private room, if you want to come in you need permission from the Warren Boss in there." and pointed to the door behind them.

The party actually stopped, turned and knocked on the other door, no reply, opened it, it's a boom closet. They turn around and all the kobolds have scarpered out the room.

>>49744565
Make it a long-rest resource, seriously when the Druid knows he can only do it twice a day he will be a lot less rampant with it. At the moment Druids tend to use it whenever possible, since one use can last a couple combats, they get knocked out? Use it again. After that they just short rest since they are out. It's not so easy with long rests, so likely they will use it once and make it count, then save the last use for dangerous unexpected situations.

>>49744565
They retain their original HP total and Hit Dice, instead gaining 2+Druid Level Temporary HP upon Wildshaping. Damage persists between shapes.

>>49744610
I like this, it's not debilitating, it's thematically appropriate and it's simple

>>49744492
Elemental druid. Pick an element, be devoted to that element.

Humanoid sacrifice druid. Wickermen and shit

Insect druid. Turns into bugs and swarms of bugs.

>>49744565
The big issue is basically that Wild Shape is free HP, and a whole fucking lot of it. Just don't make it free HP. Give them a static value of temporary HP to represent the beast form's toughness, or really anything that isn't giving them huge pools of damage soak.

>>49744662
That's not really fixing the problem of them still having double HP pools.

>>49744625
I meant to say Broom closet but that also works.

Can someone somehow "Arm" and "disarm" glyphs of warding, so one can say, move then around as necessary?

>>49744735
Yes, but only with the wish spell.

>>49744735
No
Why is glyph the hot new meme

>>49744662
>>49744610
It would be really easy to just shift out and back again to avoid this penalty. They still get basically 3 reserves of HP per short rest. Absolutely retarded.

>>49744735
"You can also set conditions for creatures that don’t trigger the glyph, such as those who say a certain password."
Of course, you can also add "except on Tuesdays" to the condition or something. The spell is really vague about what conditions are possible.

>>49744786
They have to use a whole additional action to avoid gaining exhaustion?

>>49744565
By not being a bitch and taking the charop board's ridiculously generous interpretation of it.

>>49744538
Yeah, Land Druids literally get 2-3 extra spells from wizards and Natural recovery which equates to one or two extra spell slots a day.

Being able to move through non-magical difficult terrain and non-magical plants don't harm you is incredibly counter-intuitive on the class which has several spells to create magical difficult terrain and magical plants, like you can do so many effects that help shape the battlefield but can't take advantage of it yourself?

>>49744818
This is still a really good trade in favor of the Druid.

>>49744822
There's not even an interpretation, bro. Straight game text.

>>49744735
Depending on the spell, you can set up weird conditions. Like day you want to set up a fireball glyph. Make the condition "I say poop". The next time your character says "poop", no matter where your character is, a fireball will be cast centered on your character.

Go more advanced. With the condition "a creature exists that has been flipped off by my character after the casting of this glyph" will cause whatever you flip off the first time after casting to be the center of a large fireball.

>>49744678
Would having it set as "When you wild-shape, your HP remains the same but you gain 2d8+Druid level Temp Hitpoints." work.

The stupidest thing about wildshape is how a nearly dead, bleeding druid shifts into a perfectly content and healthy wolf.

>>49744838
Glyphs canne move, lad

>>49744699
Beasts have small AC and no spellcasting. A group of enemies can finish them off one turn

>>49744852
Glyphs can't move, but they target the triggering creature regardless of range, and even across dimensions.

It's a poorly worded spell, but this is raw.

>>49744874
Ok but the range of fireball is 120ft.

>>49744917
This

>>49744851
That would be just fine.

>>49744917
Irrelevant.

>>49744946
A spell cannot target something outside its range

>>49744830
Their ability isn't meant to be a combat ability, it's to travel fast through forests and wildernesses. If it's occasionally okay on the battlefield, that's gravy, not its primary intention.

>>49744874
>>49744946
RAW you're not necessarily wrong, but any DM who allows this is a complete idiot and should have their license revoked.
The spell really does need to have a maximum activation range, though, which isn't anywhere in the description.

>>49744970
That's a general rule, yes. Glyph is a specific rule that trumps it.

>>49744946
Well ok but lets say you say poop and you are on a different planet then the glyph shoots the fireball and it travels 120ft. in your direction and disappears or explodes

So like good job champ

>>49744861
Yes, this is totally why Moon Druids aren't some of the tankiest spellcasters. Totally

>>49744986
No it doesn't. It targets but doesn't suddenly gain infinite range
>>49745001
If a druid wants to give up spellcasting to be a bear go for it

>>49744974
I agree that in most campaigns the dm should rule against it. But it could have a place in a less serious campaign, or a more high magic intrigue type, where every wizard knows this, and sets up glyphs all day every day, meaning to safely assault any wizard you have to find their glyph stash first.

Which is usually protected with glyphs.

>>49745023
But that's not really how it works. A druid functions normally as a spellcaster, and then when their HP gets low they just wildshape and ride out the encounter. Then they can recover that wildshape along with their lost HP when they short rest. The issue is that Wildshaping is this huge sponge that is basically doubling or even tripling your base HP.

>>49745023
The range limitations are general rules. Glyph is a specific one. The spells have all range due to glyphs poor wording.

File: 1437696243393.jpg (527KB, 2048x1377px) Image search: [Google]

527KB, 2048x1377px

Jumping back into dming after a year or more of having not done. Which module should I run? I hear LmoP is pretty good.

>>49744735

I would allow for a "glyph reactivates if it stays stationary for an hour" rule, if it's decently low level.

>>49741791
Wizards get more spells known, more spells prepared, can change their spells after a long rest, can regen spell slots after a short rest, get amazing features like Portent, can cast great utility spellls known as Rituals for free while also not needing to prepare them, can learn spells from spell scrolls,

Sorcerers get some points that let them cast a spell and have it effect TWO people instead of one. They can do this a couple times per long rest. Some sorcerers get a couple more points of AC and some sorcerers have a chance at casting fireball on themselves at random

That's the difference

I'm playing for the first time and I'm a paladin.

Our DM is saying my divine smite can't crit and that I have to declare its use before rolling for attack. Isn't this pretty fucky? Everything I've read states the exact opposite.

>>49745196
Yeah, your DM is wrong. It's a regular attack, but with some added divine magic to it. If you roll a nat 20, you should be good to go.

>>49745196
Divine smite by RAW is used after you hit an enemy, your GM is either an asshat or uninformed.

I don't know if critting on the attack and then choosing to smite doubles the smite damage. I'd rule no on that personally, I see crits as doubling the damage you do with the weapon. Kinda be ridiculous if crit applied to the Smite too, it's not like Paladin isn't bursty enough. Don't know about RAW on that though.

>>49745196
Yeah show him the Divine Smite section of PHB which says "when you hit" and thrn show him the Critical Hit section which says you double all damage dice

>>49745240
Read the PHB. You double all damage dice

>>49745222

It can crit but you do have to state you want to use it before you attack roll. You can't just sit back and wait to roll a nat20 then declare you want to divine smite and get a guaranteed crit on it.

>>49745092
You are wrong

>>49745266
Exactly, yeah. Can't be a shithead and only wait to use it when you crit. That'd be super broken.

>>49745196

Your DM is wrong on critical hits. Everything that has a damage roll gets doubled.
It's literally on the PHB, right around the bit that says "critical hits"

"Attacks, spells and abilities"

"A crit so nice your hit rolls twice" being the saying

Declaring smite before use however, varies from table to table, where I've seen it enforced more often than not.

>>49745266
>>49745274

Stop being an idiot. When you hit with the attack is right there in the PHB

>>49745272
I am right.

>>49745298
No

>>49745286
not that anon but don't you think that's kind of bad? It promotes a videogamey playstyle if you ask me.

>>49745300

Strictly speaking, he's correct yes.

I suppose the wording is vague because it makes sense that a level 9 Glyph of Warding probably should be able to get its spells across an absurd range

>>49745240
Wouldn't disallowing divine smite crits cripple my later game damage output? I'm in a group of 7 and I'm the only melee aside from a half Orc barb.

He's also been allowing his thief friend to crit on sneak attack which really makes me question why divine smite couldn't crit.

Also isn't the reason it is declared after an attack roll because Paladins are so limited on spell slots?

>>49745316
>Be a paladin
>Feel god is with me, strike right into enemy moslem's side, piercing the armor
>Channel divine fury into the wound.

It's all in how you fluff it.

>>49745316
Too bad how sad
>>49745322
No it doesn't. The range of a spell doesn't change just because its origin is a glyph or cast at 9th level

>>49745344
Anon, we have to acknowledge where the rules fuck up, so hopefully wizards hires better writers in the future.

You'd have a better argument if you just said "rule zero bitch". As it stands you have a not an argument.

>>49745332

If miss on the attack roll then you don't smite either and don't use the spell slot.

>>49745344

Okay, try this on for size

Glyph of Warding, Dimension Door

When someone in another plane takes a poop, Teleport them under that poop

It's within range, since the spell range is relative to source, and source is the trigger action, and Glyph of Warding does not specify the distance relative to the glyph for triggering

RAW it works

File: file.jpg (67KB, 799x388px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 799x388px

>>49745375

>>49745421
Dimension Door doesn't target a single creature or an area. It can't be stored in a glyph of warding

>>49745342
Thats actually pretty good. I just dont want the paladin to hold back his righteous fury because he could theoretically have it be more effective.
>>49745375
This might be the best way of handling it. Makes it so paladins arent hunting crits but still feel the benefits when one lands. also adds more hype when the 20 comes up

>>49745450

I still wouldn't let that crit if it hits after the fact though, because he's not rolling a spell attack, but he's burning a spell slot to do it.

I'd gift that crit if it was called, and I'd let the divine smite hold onto until the strike hits, but no Critbending for you matey

>>49745463

sure it does. Ye'r a creature Harry

>>49745469
But you are wrong. When an attack hits INCLUDING CRITS the paladin can smite

Stop being a faggot

>>49745484
But that's completely contrary to the rules just because you don't...want paladins to be able to capitalize on their crits?

>>49745450
When the attack hits. It says nothing about when the player chooses to use it. The hit is determined by the attack roll. You still have to include Smite in your Attack before you make the attack roll. If you hit then you can apply smite and its damage.

File: file.jpg (89KB, 873x458px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 873x458px

>>49745484

>>49745496
Dimension door affects you, the caster, it doesnt target anyone or anything else

>>49744735
From reading the spell, you can't really arm it, but you can disarm it or set the conditions so it does not affect you or any of your allies. If you read the spell, it actually gives a pretty solid descriptor of what it can and cannot do. It might not spell out every single detail in black and white but it does a pretty solid job with what information it does give.

>>49745569
When an attack hits the player CAN expend a spell slot to divine smite

Not "has to" not "cannot" but "can". The choice is when an attack hits.

Jesus you are an idiot

Why not just post to Crawford's many Sage Advice answers saying that smite crits?

http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/12/28/can-a-paladin-with-a-critical-choose-to-use-divine-smite/

File: file.jpg (237KB, 2554x1389px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 2554x1389px

>>49745569

>>49745633

That dirty faggot is wrong.

File: Whedothiweare.png (936KB, 644x644px) Image search: [Google]

936KB, 644x644px

>>49745502
I just jumped in on this topic.
>but you are wrong
I haven't stated anything of substance, merely expressed my apprehension of paladins, crits, and smites interaction as is. I don't think removing an intended class feature or it's interaction with the critical mechanic is a good way to address my concern. I just know, that I, personally as a battlemaster held on to my maneuvers until a crit rolled around. I can only imagine it being much more enticing for a paladin to do such. I feel as though you're missing the point of my post. Crit-smites as is encourage quite conservative (Should I use this? should I use it later?) use of spell slots, and I personally as a gm would be dissapointed to see my players squirrel away resources, as if they were playing final fantasy.

also
>stop being a faggot
pic related

Had a "That Guy" Goolock aspie in our table, that wanted to play as Deadpool

In return, once we got his number down, every time he opened his mouth the party would go as if he had just rambled off mad speech and tentacles came out of his mouth

>*something something, let me interrogate him guys, I know pain*
>"GOOD LORD MAN, WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU?"
>Just incomprehensible ramblings. Quick, fetch the cleric
>"stop it"
>"Holy Pelor, I had just cleaned this tunic!"

>>49742568
I've played on worse.

>>49745698
>The one man on sage advice who's word is considered an official ruling is wrong not me!

>>49745698
This is the problem with so many DMs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXsLec9JHz0
A classic

>>49744492
>Really want a Druid martial that doesn't wildshape
>Can't really figure out why Ancients Paladin and Ranger don't do it for me

I dunno man, I just want, like, tree roots for hands to beat people with.

Quick question regarding a slight homebrew: barbarian player in group wants to use an Ape as his totem animal. I'm thinking about just using the Bear totem benefits in all but name, but I'm curious as to ways to differentiate it a bit more. I was thinking something related to throwing heavy weapons/objects/creatures, but am unsure how to balance it mechanically (improvised ranged attack after successful grapple/athletics check could work, but that requires at minimum two turns of setup for what will likely be worse than just attacking).

>>49746846
Improvised weapons of sufficient size have the Thrown (20/60) property and deal 1d10 damage for you while you are raging?

>>49746846
More mobility maybe

>>49746846
Replace his rage with going bananas

>>49746817
You're a faggot. Fey Paladin is great

>>49746924
That's hurtful man.

I can't help it if it's been my dream since childhood to have trees for hands.

>>49746900
Something along this sounds good, places a good emphasis on using the environment; could be a lot of fun. 1d10 seems a bit much, but seems balanced by the limit to range and that it's only usable when raging.

>>49746908
I was thinking a bonus climbing, but that's super situational. Borrowing the Elk totem's charge through ability could work though.

For clarification, I plan on giving him the lvl 3 Bear ability for the tankiness.

>>49746920
kek. I'm glad you made that joke first, because he sure as shit will and I best get used to it.

>>49746969
Do you also like dicks in your butt, cakeboy? Roll an Ancients Paladin like everyone else.

File: 5ea4a7e0c5d4a0dfbc301180bfe173ee.jpg (58KB, 560x1000px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 560x1000px

One of the kingdoms of my setting has a military division of battlemages.

One of my players wants to be one of these battlemages. However, I feel that no current gish really matches.

Bladesinger's all wrong flavor wise and the battlemage's aren't full casters with rituals and shit. Bladelock doesn't fit at all. Valor Bard doesn't fit. Eldritch Knight is the closest, but they're much more battle than mage and I'd like it to be 50/50.

Anyone know of a good homebrew to match this? I could just reflavor Valor Bard but the Bard spell list isn't right for them and neither is expertise or inspiration.

>>49746969
ancients paladin is great. Pally's such a good core that any archetype for it would still be good

ask your GM to let you flavor two shortswords as your "tree root hands".

Though honestly I don't really understand what you want and "tree root hands" sounds pretty dumb.

>>49746992
Favored Soul? Maybe they all worship some regimental war god?

The whole 'Angel wings at level 14' thing might not be the tone you're going for though.

>>49746992
Battlemage is kinda vague. Do you mean a classic gish, buff spells and martial prowess? Or like magical artillery?

For the former, Valor Bard with variant spells or maybe a refluffed Bladelock. For the latter, Evoker Wizard.

File: KeeperOfTheGroveArt.jpg (74KB, 450x700px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 450x700px

>>49747010
Joking aside, I always liked the claws on the Keepers of the Grove from Warcraft.

>>49747041
Yea favored soul doesn't fit at all really, nothing religious about them.

Should say this is a setting we've played in for awhile, this player's old character died. The battlemages (The Blueblades) have been in the campaign a couple times, once helping the party directly with defending a town. Players all think they're cool because one of their favorite NPCs is an Ex-Blueblade.

Player wants to play one, but I dunno what to represent them with as a PC class.

>>49747069
As I said, they'd be like 50/50 martial magic. I imagine a halfcaster with armor proficiencies up to Medium, Martial weapons, d10 hit die.

Paladin could be edited to fit but I'd have to change so much I may as well just use homebrew. Lay on Hands, Smite, Divine sense, oaths etc would all have to be changed.

>>49747132
Make your own ranger or paladin spec, or just assume they're F/W.

>>49747132
Half battlemaster half ek

>>49747148
>Make your own ranger or paladin spec

Like I said they'd be changed so much that I may aswell just make a new class.

Is there a good place to get homebrew shit? Somewhere that is not that godawful dandwiki

>>49747132
I'd say be a favored soul with the Arcana cleric domain from SCAG. It'll net you some utility spells, so you can focus on buffing and blasting with your class spells. It's really the closest thing you're gonna get. Aside from the names of some of the abilities it's not really religious at all.

>>49746817
that's why i love Druidbarians.

I AM THE WRATH OF THE EARTH GIVEN SHAPE

>>49747132
>>49747148
>>49747207
>>49747271
I found this:

http://dnd-5e-homebrew.tumblr.com/post/150260755417/magus-class-by-coolgamertagbro-sterling-vermin

What do you guys think about it? It's pretty much what I imagined.

seems a bit feature rich, every homebrew is for some reason.

>>49738978
What does /5eg/ think of DM's who are just trying to kill the players instead of telling a story?

What does /5eg/ think of DM's who make random creatures spawn to constrain the player characters into sticking with what she/he/they want them to do instead of the player characters having true freedom?

>>49747909
Storytime? This sounds especially cancerous

What is the bare minimum needed for a setting?

If you were a brand new player would you like something more like a traditional fantasy game, or something uncommon or strange?

What kind of 1st party builds are there available to play buff/bot heals? So far all I know is:

Cleric (Life)
Bard (Lore)
Druid

Any other options?

>>49747953
>go stealthy
>approach enemies from behind trees

"oh you're doing things that endanger your entire party even thought you're completely by yourself and no one can even see you right now!

>six giant spiders spawn around me
>she says one attacks me and completely ignores the fact that i'm stealthed and wearing armor
>i mention im wearing armor and stealth, she says neither one matters
>disengage and walk back to my party

"oh two more giant spiders that are poisonous spawn here and are attacking your party now! even though i said before you were only a short distance away from your party, it's suddenly going to take ten full rounds of combat for you to get back!"

>rest of my party dispatches the spiders
>i don't get to attack a single thing the entire session

She also is determined, even though I told her the actual rule, that rolling a crit means you simply do max damage possible with the dice you roll, instead of rolling double the damage dice. It's so fucking infuriating.

>>49748006
Paladin with auras and definitely better healing than Druid

>>49745711
You are a cunt

>>49748012
Find a better DM.

>>49748012
>she
I have discovered the root of the problem

It's a damn shame we still don't have a /tg/ 5e LFG listing.

>>49748012
your dm is shit.

So I am stuck on a character concept and woyld like some input. I want to make a human explorer with the observant feat. I'm thinking of going wizard but none of the archetypes really feel right for my character. Wizard as a whole feels right for the character though. Should I take a look at some other class options or should I just choose a random wizard archetype? Could a necromancer wizard be an artifact hunting explorer? Cause that would be pretty interesting if nothing else works.

>>49748146
If you want to be an explorer then Ranger

>>49748146
One of the girls in my campaign is running a 5e artificer homebrew. That sounds like it might be what you're looking for?

File: 1475031525291.png (352KB, 450x499px) Image search: [Google]

352KB, 450x499px

>>49748076

>>49748179
>>49748146
Explorer was probably a poor choice in words. He actually more a hunter of artifacts and relics. He is more of a temple / dungeon explorer than a nature / woodlands explorer.

>>49748191
An artificer could definitely work. Unfortunately I am stuck with official content only, since my group is an AL group. I've joined other non AL groups in my area in the past, but they always fall apart after a few sessions.

>>49738978
>When was the last time you played in/ran a game that was based on a non-European setting?

I'm currently running Princes of the Apocalypse with a Southern gothic flair.

>>49748280
Southern Gothic as in American Southern Gothic? That sounds really cool. I'm a DM looking for some new inspiration. What are some conflicts/enemies your party encounters?

>>49748244
>Unfortunately I am stuck with official content only, since my group is an AL group.
Have you considered a Rogue with the Arcane Trickster archetype? Sounds like it might be perfect for your character,

>>49748103
No it's not. Do you really wanna play with the same people who argue about minute rule interpretations for hours on end until they're just typing insults at each other?

Or the catgirl faggots

>>49748384
That could work out pretty well. I think I'll mull that idea over for a bit. Thanks.

>>49748430
Have you seen what else lies out there in this internet wasteland?

>>49748460
Of course, I've browsed lfgs on roll20 a couple times.

The handful of campaigns I've tried out on there got ruined either by bad GMs or really really bad players.

I'm convinced that a completely random group on there has like a 5% chance at not being terrible

>>49748479
Then you'll understand why I'd rather go with the devil I know

>>49748485
Then go lurk the LFG general. I wish you luck.

I momentarily joined a PTU game from there, the GM was a 16 year old hue and two of the players were "girls" who refused to use mics (100% for real, that actually happened), despite the GM having clearly required everyone to use mics. That campaign didn't even make it past character creation.

File: styx.jpg (128KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 1920x1080px

So I really want to play a goblin rogue as soon as Volo's guide comes out but I'm struggling to find any motivation to join a party. The only backstory I could think of right now is an being exiled from his goblin pack/tribe/whatever for being different (smarter and stronger than regular goblins) and traveling the world to find other goblins more like himself. Do you guys have any better ideas?

Also, what alignment should I be? Anything with good in it seems a bit odd for a goblin but I don't want to be killed by the party for fear of backstabbing.

>>49748644
Oh christ. Is Volo's really going to have a Goblin PC race?

>>49748651
Yes, that's been confirmed since it was announced.

>>49748670
Well, I hope it's some sort of new Goblinoid and not just a Goblin.

Because a straight Goblin PC race is completely retarded

>>49748682

Why do you say that? I can't see how it would be "completely retarded"

>>49743745
>Two Kobold swordsmen, and two wielding a spider attached to a stick. Spiderstick is a bludgeoning weapon, and the spider will predictably bite anything it hits. Spiderstick lasts 1d3 hits before the spider dies or falls off and skitters away. Spiderstick deals 1d4 damage + Bite (Giant Spider bite with a 1d4 instead of 1d8).

My DM always has something spider-related happen when there's kobolds around, they either come in riding giant spiders or they come in with barrels full of spiders or come in covered in spiders (which end up biting them too)

They had a field day when they stole my Thief's character secret weapon design: an exploding grenade that releases spiders on fire once it blows up.

Fuckin' Kobolds.

>>49748682
No, it's just a regular goblin. There will also be character races for orcs, aasimar, tritons, catfolk, and firbolgs, and probably more.

>>49748644
Kidnapped as an infant by adventurers clearing out a goblin cave, raised with any variety of ideals.

Offspring of a chief who was overthrown and put into exile from his tribe (goblin noble), being raised for the sole purpose of getting revenge on that clan.

The "pet" of an inhumane merchant or noble, eventually finding your way to freedom and wanting no one, goblin or otherwise, to go through that same life.

As for alignment, ignore it and just remember that D&D is a cooperative game, and if you don't act cooperatively you're That Guy.

>>49748693
Because in pretty much every setting Goblins are a dumb pest race?

What city is going to let a Goblin in? What town is going to let a Goblin walk about?

Why the fuck would a Goblin go traveling about with a bunch of Humans/Elves/Dwarves? Why would they allow a Goblin to go with them?

Every Goblin PC is going to be "well he's a SMARTER Goblin who isn't like the other Goblins!!"

Don't give me any "well in my setting Goblins are..." shit

>>49748700
Goblin is the only thing I have an issue with there, maybe Orcs just because we already have Half-Orcs why do we need Orcs.

What kind of Catfolk? Like, Humans with furry ears and tails garbage or some actual sort of Catfolk that isn't furbait?

>>49748739
It's a Forgotten Realms book, so the catfolk are likely to be tabaxi.

As for goblins as a race, they are about as smart as other humanoid races, objectively. They're not really that dumb, just tend to be tiny assholes that live in caves. Like gnomes, but more likable.

>>49748739
Let me summarize that post for you...
>what's forgotten realms?

File: The Ariant.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Reposting awoo to get some fresh eyes on it. Yes, I still haven't corrected that formatting on page one. Yes, there is still animu pictures. I'm still not sure if this race is up to par with the standard, so let me know if there's anything I can do for that.

>>49748844
can you filter .pdfs like you can filter images? Let's find out

>>49748723
> Raising an orphan goblin
Quick! Someone call the Goblin Slayer on this heretic!

>>49748867
Only sometimes.

File: 1e44d79b79675c726b12aa8719d3f196aa9276b0[1].jpg (114KB, 700x877px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 700x877px

>>49748867
Problem?

>>49748723
>Offspring of a chief who was overthrown and put into exile from his tribe (goblin noble), being raised for the sole purpose of getting revenge on that clan.
I like that one. What should I call my family heirloom dagger (that's actually just a broken sword looted from a dead adventurer goblin-generations ago)?

I also plan to enter cities disguised as a leper halfling or something.

>>49748460
I form groups in the gamefinder thread and I seem to have good luck with not getting gigantic faggots.

>>49748844
This actually seems surprisingly reasonable and balanced.
>Maturity at 14
God-tier waifu shit right there

>>49749032
Literally cut-and-pasted from half-orc.

>>49749038
>implying half-orcs aren't the best waifus

>>49749063
Dragonborn are considered full adults at 15 as well. Not saying that a 14 year old awooo isn't waifu, but that several races reach maturity around that time.

>>49745711
>and I personally as a gm would be dissapointed to see my players squirrel away resources, as if they were playing final fantasy.

Could we please stop this whole "whatever I don't like is a videogame!" thing? It's getting pretty fucking retarded.

>>49748844
I want a sidebar with stereotypes about other races please. I need to know how to be an asshole to the rest of the party.

>>49749032
>he doesnt waifu 60 year young dwarf babes
fuck off slag

>>49749104
>Dwarves reach maturity at 50
If you wanna bang old ladies that's your prerogative.

>>49749097
I honestly don't have any ideas for this at the moment. If you have something in mind, let me know and I might include it

>>49745711
> spam divine smite
> hurrdurr you're treating this like a vidya
> save divine smite for a tactical opportunity
> hurrdurr you're treating this like a vidya

Nothing can please you. You just love to diss people playstyle because of your own insecurity.

>>49749220
>>49749074
this general is quite toxic desu

What is some early game ranged attack option for moon druid against flying enemy or archer?

Female steeder to jump on them? Ape for stone throw?

>>49749245
New general when?

>>49747480
Enspell and Aegis are right away at odds with 5e design philosophy, granting minor scaling AC/Attack bonuses.

I need to read the rest but that's already not very promising.

>>49749299
You could also try a bird