/5eg/ D&D Fifth Edition General

First for 4e being the superior edition.

>>50615126
>(You)

>>50615126
Seconded.

>>50615077
Man that Fighter UA is underwhelming.

>>50615152
I like the Arcane Archer.
Everything else was not to my taste, I will agree.

>>50615152
Fuck off, this has been complained about enough

>>50615144
>>50615126
You have your own general. Go engage with other people who agree with you rather than come into ours if you're just going to shitpost. We can do that by ourselves, thank you very much.

File: Shadowcaster 5e Homebrew v2.2 Class.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

posting my brew one last time. last time i posted it anon's confused it for a broken as fuck sorcerer brew a few posts above mine.

feedback is greatly appreciated.

>>50615170
Maybe wizards should stop releasing underwhelming options for martials then.

>>50615126
Maybe if you're a 15 year old WoW player

>>50615169

I'd agree. I liked them thematically though I wish we'd gotten a duelist instead of the sharpshooter. Two ranged arhcetypes was pretty excessive.

>>50615152
I really like all the level 3 abilities. But past that many of them needed more work.

>>50615152
Yup.

>>50615169
>picking the option that ties for shittiest
You had one job.

>>50615182
>implying I don't run a 5E campaign and regularly post and lurk here
>implying that considering 4E a better edition means you hate 5E
>general faggotry
Fuck off.

>>50615170
>don't talk about thing in OP
No.

>>50615191
Completely subjective
I find them pretty cool conceptually, just not mechanically amazing
But then again it is PLAYTEST MATERIAL, so maybe you should stop expecting this to be perfect on the first try?

>>50615186
Definitely looks interesting. Gonna take a while to digest that. I will say that completely reinventing the wheel normally creates the biggest opportunity to make something busted in either direction.

>>50615219
I expect it to have more thought put into it than d&dwiki anon. Nothing more.

>>50615219
>two uses
>magically conjured ammo doesn't count as magic for the sake of resistances

Even dandwiki makes better shit than this. I expect a UA to at least have the same level of consideration put into it as a Middle Finger of Vecna original.

>>50615244
And it does

>>50615277
Not really in this case.

>>50615077
I always want to use werewolves or other lycanthropes because of the mystery angle and having to find a specific weakness. It'd work great for horror/mystery sessions, but it's way to easy to metagame.

I actually managed to absue that fact once by having a one-shot where the monster was a scarecrow instead. The players were so confident it was a werewolf that they actually took the monstrous scarecrow from the fields while it was standing still to hide and tied a bunch of meat to it to use as bait for an ambush.

Reposting, but if I would recommend any of my suggestions I'd seriously recommend 'use silence to silence the bard'. Bonus points if the bard can't see what casts the silence effect so they can't counterspell it, and would need disspell magic instead.

>>50614627
Just isolate them, swarm them with kobolds and make the kobolds shove them to the floor, grapple them, disarm them if possible and kick the shit out of their body.
Solves every problem.

Eh, but
>berzerker
Trigger rage, then run. Repeat.
Makes sense flavour-wise.
>sorcerer
Trigger twinned buffs, run, repeat. Otherwise, simply just aim for them. They're the most vulnerable character there.
>Rogue
Pretty much anything that inflicts disadvantage on them. Use your imagination. Problem with grapple monsters is rogues can have very high anti-grapple rolls. I'd probably just suggest baiting them into running ahead of the party and then isolating them.
Makes a lot of sense flavour-wise since you expect rogues to be easily baited, and they run around a lot and try out all the traps.
>Bard
Probably the hardest, but you can run down their spells over a long day or, even better, silence them. Remember the 'silence' spell?
Definitely suitable against a bard.
>EK fighter
Great AC, pretty meh saving throws until they get indomitable.. And that's limited. As suggested elsewhere, focus on charms / wisdom saving throws.

>>50615299
>Just isolate them, swarm them with kobolds and make the kobolds shove them to the floor, grapple them, disarm them if possible and kick the shit out of their body.
Solves every problem.

Sorc can fireball / lightning bolt more than once. The party can tank the collateral damage.

>>50615233
i based it mostly off of the UA mystic, but reigned in the brokeness as much as i can while adding a neat little spin on how the archetypes ought to work. Way less 'psi' points too. honestly i think it might be underpowered, still need to playtest it at higher levels though.

>>50615351
Sure, the sorcerer can fireball themselves if they really want, and if they do it before they're grappled beyond being able to do somatic components.
And if it fails, eh. It's just some kobolds.

File: Shadowcaster 5e Homebrew v2.2 Spells.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>50615186
Also going to post the 'disciplines' or spell abilities. Fair warning: theres about 12 pages of new spell and spell abilities. Dont get scared away by the sheer amount. If you find something broken, just point it out to me and move on. Its hard enough to get someone to actually look at it, thats all I can really ask for.

Need a character that can blast and heal. Not sure if I should go for cleric with light domain or wizard with life domain via theurgy. Wat do? 1st level, party is rouge that plans to go swashbuckler/battlemaster, conjuration wizard, and moon druid.

>>50615277
Definitely not. Same for the barbarian. And honestly 2/3rds of the druid and cleric ones. And half of the Bard one.

>>50615466
why do you need a blaster? Bar d would work nicely for both, though a cleric is right at its heels. Cleric isnt as blasty as youd like.

not going to recommend the theurge because its pretty broken.

>>50615466

Light cleric or a bard X/warlock 2. Eldritch blast gives you more than enough combat oomph while you can heal fine.

File: brave.gif (2MB, 300x169px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 300x169px

My party got wiped last session, so we're all re-rolling. I decided i want to base my character on Kamen Riders. Transforming, flamboyant special attacks, that sort of thing.

After some googling, i actually found another anon had the same idea a few months ago in this thread. The suggestions he got included playing a Eldritch Knight and using Mage Armor. Then seeing if the DM will approve of binding an armor and a weapon instead of two weapons.

Our DM typically allows reasonable tweaks to things, and has stated our new characters will start at Level 3 with one free feat, max potential health up to level 3, and a +1 weapon OR armor. Variant Humans do not get two feats so there's no point to that.

I wanted to know if anybody else had some ideas on how to make a Kamen Rider themed character with as little homebrew as possible?

>>50615469
You realize the quick cycle of release and feedback surveys is so you can give this kind of insightful reasoning to WotC to refine the content, right?

>>50615460
>A target within 100ft must succeed a Dexterity save or take 2d4+1 necrotic damage as an action.
honestly stopped reading there

>>50615505
>My party got wiped last session

I'd love to TPK my party, but make it look completely natural / random, and not like I'm out for them. Like, I seriously wish to do this to my group, but they've gotten out of every situation I've put them in (and really earned it too).

I just secretly desire to kill them all.

>>50615519
Too good? I had it as 1d4 before but was told that was too weak. didnt want to put it as a standard 1d8 because thats just sacred flame except it deals a worse damage type and it cant kill.

How to fix?

>>50615534

We killed a big bad and his crew at the end of a cave system, and on our way out we met a huge monster at the entrance.

The DM wasn't even subtle about it.

>>50615507
Refine implies the content is worth salvaging.

"Completely remake" is what is required for most of the options.

>>50615505

With as little homebrew? My vote would actually go to Barbarian - your rages perfectly emulate the effects of putting on your super suit and deciding its time to kick ass. What feat you take is up in the air, but some feats to help you kamen rider it up:

>Shield Master
>Sentinel
>Great weapon master

Reposting from last thread with upgrades.

This is intended as the final boss of sorts for the first arc of the campaign that will have the party at level 4, fleeing from an execution they disrupted. The fiendish construct will be dispatched to kill the vigilante that orchestrated it and return the condemned prisoner. It'll have a pair of down-graded hellhounds (CR 2) as a hunting pack that the NPC will occupy while the party handles the real threat.

Everything look in order? The party consists of a homebrew that can best be described as a valor bard with warlock spells, a Devotion paladin, an assassin, and an Ancestor calling shaman. The bardlock has a magical weapon as does the rogue. The rogue won't be catching this thing surprised.

>>50615564
That sounds rad, but my last character was a barbarian so i'd like to avoid that class.

I'll keep those feats in mind though, thanks man.

File: Canis Cataphractus Drone.png (122KB, 464x1107px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 464x1107px

>>50615574
And since I'm a troglodyte, I'll remember to post the bastard.

>>50615505
If say Warlock for at-will mage armor and disguise self. Usually a better fit for magical girls, but I think it'd fit just as well.

>>50615561
Actually giving feedback instead of saying "this sucks, I don't like it" worked for the ranger. Try telling them how you'd remake the stuff, genius.

File: Screen Shot 2016-12-09 at 10.46.27 AM.png (257KB, 414x308px) Image search: [Google]

257KB, 414x308px

>>50615554
no its just horribly written. compare yours to this.

>>50615639
yeah im familiar with EB. How is it horribly written? I dont follow. multiple saves as opposed to multi attacks.

>>50615558
>The DM wasn't even subtle about it.

That's my problem. Every situation either the dice fuck me, or the players RP their asses off.

I don't want it to be obvious that I'm like, "yep, you guys are done."

I've been tinkering with a sorcerer homebrew as part of an overall remake of the classes.

It's largely going to be more powerful versions of each class, with lots of low CD or at will abilities to encourage more varied and tactically interesting ability.

With the sorcerer this means making meta magic not use resources, but limiting it to once per round. Also, you can use meta magic on other people's spells now.

Another part of this is making up meta magic effects for each of the subclasses. So what would be a good metamagic for dragon sorcerers, wild magic, storm, and shadow?

>>50615605
I have in every poll so far dipshit.

>>50615688
>metamagic on other people's spells

damn, thats pretty cool anon.

>metamagic for subclasses
give them specialized effects. dragon sorc deal bnus +1 damage to elemental spell. wild magic rolls a d4 and gets a bonus to the next ability check equal to number rolled. shadow gets free hide check when metamagic'ing, dont know jack about storm so cant help you there. maybe change damage type to thunder or something? idk.

>>50615662
I don't really understand anon either

It's basically just sacred flame but more range and damage but necrotic in terms of description and effect.

>>50615662
ok
>A target within 100ft must succeed a Dexterity save or take 2d4+1 necrotic damage as an action.
should be something like
>You shoot ribbons at a creature you can see within range. The creature must succeed on a Dexterity saving throw or take 2d4+1 necrotic damage.

>>50615738
>>50615662
Oh, I think I get it.

You're making several attacks, yet they're save throws, so you might make a creature make four save throws in a row.

You should probably make it increase damage instead of gaining additional ribbons.

>>50615756
Oh. gotcha. i thought you were talking about the actual spell itself. ill fix that. thank you.

>>50615786
so multple saves are not the way to go? yeah i can get behind that.

>>50615493
>>50615500
Not really interested in Bard for flavor reasons. Apparently no one decided to pick up any good ranged options and while the druid can heal a bit they'll be to busy pushing people's shit in with their gorilla hands.

>>50615077

What's the secret to running a successful Horror adventure?

>>50615826
managing expectations and your players being on board with it being a horror game and adjusting their roleplaying appropriately.

>>50615826
Your players have to buy into the concept and you need to set the mood. Don't break character often, adjust lighting, etc. to keep things in horror mode. Keep them thoroughly in the dark about how strong things actually are and don't be afraid to make them flee from combat on the regular.

>>50615804
Well, it's awkward.

Sacred flame is a 60ft, radiant damage, 1d8 (4.5 average) single-target dex save with +1d8 damage every now and then.

This is a 100ft, necrotic damage, 2d4+1 (6 average) flexible targets (one to four) dex save, but then has multiple things.
It should probably state if you can target the same person multiple times and that if you target the same creature multiple times, they only make one save for all of the things.

>>50615826
It has to be a mystery as well. You can't just have the monster confront the party and murder someone in front of them. They wont run, even if it seems totally immune and is slower than them, and they'll just complain after.

Instead, you need to have them put together the clues from other crime scenes that this thing isn't something they can beat in a straight fight. They need to research its weaknesses and carefully plan their confrontation.

>>50615887
i can reduce the range, and change it so that its all based on a single save, like you mentioned. Im still not confident about the damage though. i think it averages 1 point higher than EB which is not a good thing.

>>50615077
>What monsters have you wanted to use in a campaign but were hesitant because they might be seen as cliche/uninspired?
OP pic related. Basic undead are the easiest enemies because pretty much anyone of any alignment will attack them with glee. They're pretty much fantasy punching bags.

I honestly don't do many mandatory combat encounters unless it's important to the plot. Most of the combat so far has been the town guard when my rogue get handsy or my (purposefully) retarded fighter makes too big of a scene.

>>50615077
I was always hesitant about using remorhazes, but then I just said fuck it and used them. Players loved them.

>>50615077
Dragons, actually. 5e dragons aren't very interesting IMO, and I struggle to create memorable personalities for them.

>>50615936
yeah ill just remove the +1 to damage, so its bse 2d4, single save for each target. range of... 60ft? 80ft? is 100 still fine? shit idk.maybe severely reducing the range is the way to go. say 50ft?

>>50615936
I wouldn't compare it to EB, because it's dex save based. Dex saves can be better than attacks versus AC, or they can be worse, depending on various things such as if you're using things that happen on an attack, if you want to disrupt concentration on a spell (multiple attacks is better than a single source of damage), if the enemy's dex save is poor...

But if it's supposed to be a balanced cantrip, it's not.

Eldritch blast, without agonizing blast / other bonuses, is usually the best cantrip in the PHB. It averages 5.5 damage per hit, the thing you have averages 6.
Sacred flame is pretty good, but only averages 4.5 without bonuses. However, sacred flame is similar since it's a dex save.

>>50616036
How are 5e dragons not very interesting?

>>50616036
I have the opposite problem. I find most types of dragons and coming up with cool encounters for them very interesting, but I just know people don't want to play a game that's nothing but killing dragons.

Makes them feel less special

>>50616054
yeah, i agree with you.reducing the damage is in order. would 2d4 be fine? or is the average of 5 still too high?

I hadn't thought about disrupting concentration. thats a very good point. more reason to not allow it to force multiple saves.

>>50616064
The effective way to play them seems to be "fly over, breathe, wait until breath recharges."

They're kinda shit if they get grounded.

>>50616036
The big fat dragon in Gracklstugh in OotA is pretty great

>>50616105
2d4 is fine. While it is a higher average, it's also less likely to roll maximum.

>>50616110
Have you read any of their Monster Manual entries? Legendary actions, lair actions, and lair hazards are plenty interesting, and dragons can easily have minions to add to a fight.

>>50616054
>>50615936
Oh, will say though.

It's okay for cantrips to be somewhat more powerful than others if they're part of a different class.

Eldritch blast is only gained through a level in warlock, and that's generally too much of an investment for a wizard to bother. A wizard could take two levels for agonizing blast but not only do they need charisma to make the most of it, it's two whole multiclass levels, so they'd rather stick with their 1d10 firebolt.

>>50616105
If it's save-based, it shouldn't really be making somebody do several saves a turn unless there are multiple conditions/effects.
2d4 is +0.5 on average over 1d8 (sacred flame) but it's fine if it's better since clerics won't get to have the cantrip by default. And radiant is kinda better anyway. You can keep it at 100ft and it'll certainly still be better, but it's not like clerics are going to multiclass to get themselves a slightly better sacred flame.

>>50616128
It's also less likely to roll minimum.
Almost always, 2d4>1d8. 1d8 is better if you have an enemy with 6-8 HP left. 2d4 is better if you have an enemy with 2-5 or 9+ HP left.

how is this, then?

Ribbon of Dusk

A ribbon of shadow springs from your hand, draining vitality where it strikes.

A target within 100ft must succeed a Dexterity save or take 2d4 necrotic damage as an action. If this spell would reduce a creature to 0 hp, they are automatically stabilized.

You may strike with additional ribbons when you reach higher levels: two ribbons when you reach 5th level, three at 11th level, and four ribbons at 17th level. You can fire the ribbons at the same target or at different targets. Targets make a single save for all ribbons targeting them.

>>50616138
Yeah I have, they all have the same legendary actions which amount to "see something, tail whip, or wing buffet to get out of trouble."

The lair actions are actually different but I think I just have higher expectations of dragons to be clever and/or overwhelmingly powerful.

I can make interesting lair hazards, but I can make those for any type of monster. I've thought of two specifically for dragons. A black dragon's lair was a giant pool of acid with walkways for its minions and shelves to place its treasure on. A red dragon's lair was inside a volcano, and it could hide in and move through the lava to avoid being vulnerable to attacks.

Minions really aren't that great unless they are immune to the dragon's breath weapon. What's a good minion for a dragon besides a guard drake or a kobold?

I'll gladly take suggestions on how to make dragon encounters more interesting than "fly around, breathe, hide until recharge, repeat."

>>50615290
>>50615469
Well, let's dare to compare. Here's dand's Samurai Fighter archetype.

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Samurai_(5e_Archetype)

First, the stances are a good idea fluff-wise, but

>You can use a bonus action on your turn to enter a stance if you are wielding a melee two-handed weapon. The stance lasts for 1 minute, until you change stance or until you are knocked unconscious.
So I can grab a two-hander, enter a stance, then drop my two-hander and keep my stance? Seems a bit silly.

There's also nothing to say how often you can enter a stance, so I guess you can enter them all day long, so why last 1 minute? I mean, I guess stances eat a bonus action (reaction later on) every minute (or when you swap) but it just seems unnecessary.

The stances, mechanically, are pretty broken. You can deflect projectiles free of any action cost just by hitting a 16 AC, on top of Disengage as a bonus action? Overpowered.

Stone stance isn't very good and is poorly worded: are the enemies the ones 10 feet from you, or are the allies the ones 10 feet from you?

Fire stance has them making contested rolls whereas water stance has enemies making a roll against saving throw DC (which is weirdly worded). It's inconsistent.

Unlimited frightens (that last "until you end the effect," so if the effect ends on its own, guess they're just perma frightened) for a bonus action? OP.

Considering how often a fighter can hit you, water stance is going to force a lot of saving throws (compare it to Monk's Open Hand, where the most you can ever do with that is two a turn, and only if you choose that effect for both).

There's also two stances that give +2 and -1 to AC, which kinda goes against the game's design philosophy of not having a bunch of pluses and minuses to juggle around.

And this is just scratching the surface. Seriously, this is supposed to be better than the Unearthed Arcana version?

>>50616224
You could make them into spellcasters.

But really, that doesn't really change the fact that the most effective way to fight as a dragon is "fly around and breathe". Maybe the party would have to figure out how to ground the dragon before they can really fight it?

>>50616266
But nobody said better, they said more thought.

You can put out fairly uninspired and boring garbage without any thought.

>>50616224
>minions really aren't that great unless they are immune to the dragon's breath weapon.

Resistance, sure, but I don't think they should have to be immune.
It's always nice to see that monsters face the problem that they can hurt allies if they're reckless, too. Not just 'oh, I can ignore my allies and play without tactic because they're all immune'.

This is more of a general rule, but it's definitely fine enough if their have some close personal guards that are immune that stay with them a lot, while the underlings all much prefer to stay away from the big boss in fear of getting stomped.

Don't mind me, was just concerned about that one line.

File: Bottle Gnomes.png (1MB, 860x706px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 860x706px

>>50616224
>Minions really aren't that great unless they are immune to the dragon's breath weapon.
Dragon alchemist that creates moving vials of explosive liquid (like pic) that rupture when it uses its breath weapon on or near them.
A white or green dragon that drops avalanches/deadfalls on the party, using stealth rather than brute force to kill.
A white dragon that disguises itself as a 'particularly pale' silver dragon and demands tribute. When revealed, it flies off, and a 'gold dragon' comes flying in a bit later, saying how it just escaped from a dashingly handsome and powerful white dragon, would the party be willing to aid it in killing the handsome and dashing fiend.

>>50616328
yeah but dragons wouldn't give a shit about most of its minions. kobolds die in huge numbers anyway. cleansing fire and all that.

Rolled 5, 2, 1, 4, 3, 5, 1, 6, 3, 1, 3, 4, 6, 1, 2, 5, 5, 2, 4, 3 = 66 (20d6)

Hey, it's been a while. Some of you will remember.

Anyway, I want to troll you fags with more ridiculous bullshit theorycrafting, what's the skinny on the new books? I'm downloading SKT but I also recall that there was supposed to be a second monster manual to be released in November? It was supposed to include goblins as playable race? What's the deal?

>>50616352
yeah, volo. in the op.

>>50616352
Vol's? Vol's is pretty cool.
I like what they did with Yuan-Ti, ambivalent to disappointed about the rest of the monsters.

>>50616318
Your nitpick is true, and yet my reply points out how little thought was put into dandwiki's Samurai: stances that require you to hold a two-hander for a second and then drop it that you can enter all day but also only last a minute, with ill-defined benefits that, in some cases, are overpowered and, in other cases, go against the game's design philosophy.

Compare that to UA's Samurai and its Fighting Spirit. There, you have a feature with actual thought put into it, that lacks all the holes that are in the dandwiki's Samurai's stances.

>>50616311
I use the innate spellcaster variants to give them some stuff to fill in between those breath attack recharges.

Figuring out how to ground the dragon is not as hard as it sounds to a decently-built party that's actually high enough level to fight a dragon with legendary actions. That's how all my dragon encounters have gone so far. Once the group grounds the dragon, it's toast.

>>50616338
I like the ideas, but there's not very much there using the actual abilities of the dragons. Those are good encounters but not distinctly draconic.

>>50616328
>>50616340
A dragon giving a crap about its minions seems out of character unless it's one of the good-aligned dragons that's less inclined to fight a party of PCs in the first place.

>>50616224

I think well-designed lairs are probably pretty key to making them powerful. A black/green dragon lair with copious amounts of underwater tunnels and defendable rooms that it moves between. A blue dragon that uses its burrowing to ambush the party in an open plain, a red dragon that fights inside a volcano with plenty of kobold minions etc.

>>50616414
Well, yeah, that feature is literally "use a bonus action, gain a benefit until the end of your next turn, do it 3 times/rest."

It doesn't require any thought, because it mechanically does very little and has no dependencies on its use, or much going on.

That's also the rest of the archetype.

>>50616451
>I like the ideas, but there's not very much there using the actual abilities of the dragons. Those are good encounters but not distinctly draconic.
How is "pretending to be a different kind of dragon' not draconic?

>>50616195
So pretty much a converted version on Arrow of Dusk from Tome of Magic? Someone made a 5e conversion of the whole class and the spells (kinda lack luster). Here is their version of the spell convertes over: https://www.dandwiki com/wiki/Arrow_of_dusk_(5e_Spell)

>inb4 dandwiki is shit
I am aware, but figured since it's similar...

(Arrow of Dusk used to deal nonlethal damage back in 3.5)

>>50616492
It's close in character to what I do with rakshasas, and they're much better than dragons at being disguised manipulators.

>>50616499
*conversion

Also, I probably should have looked at your PDF, didn't know that was what you were attempting to do

>>50616451
>Figuring out how to ground the dragon is not as hard as it sounds
Fair enough. Well, I suppose you need to plan their lair to be interesting like that other anon suggested, and never have the dragon fight alone.

>>50616530
You do realize that dragons don't all act the same, and some can be sneakier or more conniving than others, right?
Maybe this is why you are having trouble.

>>50616541
lol yeaaah. hahaha

>>50616558
I think you're missing my point. I said it's a good idea, just that it's not distinctly draconic. That means it's not a unique tactic based on being a dragon, and in fact several other types of creatures perform that act better than a dragon does.

>>50616369
>>50616375
I seem to be having trouble locating it in the megatrove. Could you point me toward it's (Volo's guide's) location in the directory?

>>50616572
So you are saying that some other creature would be able to disguise itself as a pale silver dragon when it is actually a white dragon better than a white dragon?

>>50616608
No, I'm saying that if I wanted to base an encounter on deception and mistaken identity, I can do it better with a different type of creature.

The heart of the matter for me is there's nothing special about a dragon other than the fact it flies and has a breath weapon, mechanically.

>>50616594
Rulebooks -> Supplements -> "Volo's Guide to Monsters"

File: size categories gnome dwarf goliath labeled2.png (152KB, 1092x707px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 1092x707px

>>50616631
Thanks

does anybody have the psionic monk homebrew that anon posted a few weeks back? the remake of the 4elements monk but using the UA psionic as a base?

File: catbemused.gif (134KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 600x450px

>first time DM and player, me and friends decided to try out 5e over skype
>still prepping for first proper session, decide to make basic tutorial quest to make sure everyone's on the same page and test out our understanding of play, rules, combat, etc.
>get through social segment easily enough, get to first combat encounter
>a couple of skeletons and a skeleton horse on the road
>very first turn, one of the skeletons runs up to our monk and rolls a crit
>monk goes down, almost dies because our druid rolls two crit fails in a row instead of healing
>haha that was pretty unlucky right
>next combat encounter, two goblins and a hobgoblin
>hobgoblin goes down easy, the goblins turn out to be fucking ninja, one crits the druid and the other shoots down our rogue after our bard hits her with a critical fail on his crossbow shot
>the druid was one HP off an instant death
>anon, why do you keep making such difficult combat encounters?
>mfw

We've just got insanely unlucky, right? These guys have put a lot of thought into their characters, I don't want to end up losing half of them before we even finish LMoP.

>>50616624
...?
The same can be said of any monster, in fact. The only thing that differentiates oozes from dragons is one is made out of jelly and splashes ooze at things and the other flies and hordes gold.

Except that there are dragons made out of jelly that breath ooze and there are oozes that fly and collect precious goods.

So you might want to try expanding what you think is possible, since you seem to have little in the way of imagination.

Have they announced what the next book after Volo's will be?

>>50616696
Nope

>>50616690
How many players? Books are balanced around 4-6

>>50616559
That said, I just glanced over it and will be taking a much longer look at it after I get off of work. All in all... it's a nice effort. I noticed a few spelling errors and some things could be worded better.

Is there a specific reason you altered how some of the mysteries work? (The ones completely changed I mean.) Also noticed a few missing altogether.

Any reason you decided to drop the DC difficulty bump in dispelling a mystery with magic and vice versa? Really not trying to be an ass. I loved the Shadowcaster, even with its flawed design, and would love to see a good and well put together conversion for any edition.

>>50616693
Nice strawman.

What makes a dragon encounter a dragon encounter? It seems to be the lair based on what others are saying. If I have to design the lair myself, then the monster manual isn't offering me much to make the dragon itself interesting.

Any monster with sufficient mental stats can have a personality, motivations, and goals.

>>50616696
Don't expect an announcement until January, and then a release date in April.

>>50616624
What exactly do you want here? What is your dream dragon encounter? Because whenever someone offers a solution you just say "not draconic!"

>>50616767
There was no strawman, I was insulting you. There is a big difference.

>>50616690
The first level can be pretty brutal once critical hits get involved.

So you have a monk, a druid and a rogue?
None of those are awfully tough or awfully squishy. Druid especially can get a load of temporary HP for shapeshifting starting at level 2.

It should get better once they hit level 2, in general. If any particular character shines as being harder to kill, they can try to develop tactics like 'try to make enemies attack this character'.

If all else fails, they should develop tactics like run and gun.

>>50616717
Four in the tutorial, going to have five hopefully for the proper campaign when we start it. And I have some experience with DnD through vibbeo gabes so I've done my best to make sure no-one is gimped for combat.

>>50616690
>LEVEL ONE D&D for beginners
Here's the thing. The people who design these adventures and systems have been playing PnP for fucking ages and they're all massive cheeselords who exploit the shit out of combat to do whatever they want. Level 1 D&D is a fight between mice with rocket launchers, everyone blows up in one shot, PC or otherwise. So how do people play this shit? Surprise rounds every time or they run the fuck away from every fight while throwing javelins / spells / shooting crossbows. Repeat until the party levels up to have enough HP to not die on the off chance literally anything rolls a 20 against them.

But new players don't have that knowledge and they probably don't think that's how the game is supposed to be played. So you either start them at level 3 or something so they can have fucking fun right off the bat or you seriously gimp your gobbos, not just in terms of equipment, but tactics as well. Oh shit, did one of them roll a 20 and put this guy out of commission? Well, the next goblin isn't going to make his more accurate sword attack on the Wizard, he's going to throw a fucking javelin beyond its normal range and make a disadvantage attack against the Druid because goblins are dumb and you're not trying to wipe the party right out.

>>50616792
If you are concerned about survival in the first few fights, rather than send them up against a few little guys, send them against 1 medium guy. Have them fight a giant pitcher plant or something.

>>50616790
Druid, rogue, monk, bard. And we'll have a fighter for LMoP, so hopefully that should ease things up a bit.

I remember from playing ToEE (video game) that earlier levels are much more luck-based, so I hope you're right and once we get up to level 2 things will get a lot less... stressful.

>>50616758
isnt the DC for dispelling a spell the same? if not, that was unintentional, and thank you for pointing it out.

I altered how some mysteries work because i had to keep it in spirit of 5e.simple is better, and some of the old spells would make poor straight conversions.

>>50616788
Your insults look like autistic argumentation.

>>50616779
I'm not asking for solutions, I'm asking what are the signatures of a "dragon encounter" and not "a clever encounter that happens to use a dragon but could use a number of other monsters." It seems to boil down to breath weapon, flight, and lair. The lair is on the DM to design, as the Monster Manual doesn't have anything like the Volo's essays on monsters. Am I missing an element?

>>50616841

Personality is a big one. Dragons tend to have very distinct personalities and a name, hence why they often feature as BBEGs - they are more exciting when they cast a shadow of some kind over the adventure(s) instead of just being a random no-name mob you encounter in the wilderness.

>>50616824
Once you hit level 3, people should have fairer levels of health and they'll have time to run if they get hit. I've still seen some pretty ridiculous things happen.

Yetis for example paralyze their target and then make two attacks. This means they're gauranteed crits on hit, and are much more likely to hit if the target failed to resist being paralyzed.

I wouldn't say fighters are incredibly tanky unless they build for it (Say, AC focused EK), but they're more tanky than the rest there.

Barbarian, Moon Druid, EK, Paladin and some multiclasses tend to be the tankiest characters.

>>50616797
>>50616815
All good advice, thank you. I do want to start at level one, though, just so it all feels proper. I've given them a bonus feat, so that helps a little I guess.

Give me your non-monstrous character portraits, /5eg/. First post ending in 6 gets theirs turned into a sprite token.

>>50616841
>Your insults look like autistic argumentation.
If you think me saying you have little in the way of imagination is autistic argumentation then you might have ASD yourself. In fact, that would explain your lack of imagination.

>>50616863

To expand on this a little, think of it like Strahd. Strahd on his own is only kind of memorable if you just bump into him on the road - a big part of why he's a great villain is that he has his own giant fucking castle that's basically a character and adventure unto itself. That's what dragons, ideally, should be. Big, named characters that offer a deadly fight in an equally memorable lair. Vampires aren't memorable in the MM on their own, and that's what makes Strahd stand out from them. He has personality, lore, and a legendary lair.

>>50616863
Maybe my view is tainted from past 3.5 experience when a dragon of appropriate CR to the party was still incredibly strong and hard to beat.

What motivates a dragon to "cast a shadow" over a campaign? All I have to go on is they're greedy and vain to varying degrees.

>>50616923
greedy and vain, but not stupid.

hell, a friend once ran a campaign where the BBEG was a good green dragon helping elves in a war to save the forest.

File: WhiskeyWard.jpg (179KB, 630x868px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 630x868px

>>50616887
Used this art for my Arcane Trickster Rogue in the last campaign I played
He died to a lightning bolt from a cultist in a dungeon beneath a maximum security prison

>>50616949
>but not stupid
I always arrive at that part on my own and get stumped. Why doesn't this dragon have various ways to spy on the region around him so he knows when anyone is even thinking of taking a shot at him? How do I avoid making the dragon into the Saturday morning cartoon villain that's always saying, "I'll get you next time!" because he didn't just fly in and end shit himself before anyone was tough enough to challenge him?

>>50616923
A white dragon wishes to rise above the evil of its station, and become a paragon of good! It's really bad at it, and its attempts at good always end in tragedy.
A gold dragon sees that the lesser races are ruining the world, and decides that the only way to protect everything is through forced sterilizations and breeding programs.
An austere copper dragon sees that all of dragonkinds problems stem from a desire for physical wealth. Its solution? Destroy everything of value, so that way dragonkind becomes enlightened.

>>50616982
because it has more important things to do, and would much rather act through agents than do things personally, unless something requires its own personal attention.

stopping adventurers from doing things doesnt always increease its wealth or stroke its ego, so why do it? much rather send a groveling kobold army to deal with the matter, or a dominated servant, or a cult follower, or a summon.

>>50616982
Why should the dragon bother? It could be that the only threats this dragon sees are other dragons, and humanoids are not a threat to it, unless they are backed by another dragon. So the climactic final battle is this dragon asking repeatedly who sent them, what was the other dragons color, how did this other dragon figure out its plot, etc. When the dragon dies with a sword through its eye, its last breath is used to ask who did this.

And several thousand miles away, a blue dragon grins maliciously into a crystal ball.

>>50616923

3.5 also had much wilder balance problems to be fair. In 5E, deadly and challenging fights are typically several CRs above the party's level. If you want a CR 16 dragon to be a deadly and legendary fight, you throw it at level 10 characters.

As for WHY they do what they do, that depends entirely on their personality which is an important element as I mentioned in >>50616906 . That's up to you to figure out. Maybe that blue dragon yearns for the days when dragons ruled the entire world, before giants fucked it all up. Maybe that red dragon wishes to prove its devotion to Tiamat through activation of some long-forgotten relic. Maybe that silver dragon has gone mad from its fear of death and its quest to become a dracolich has turned it into a scourge across the land.

There's a million possibilities, you gotta sit down and hammer out the one you want. Yes, dragons are boring if you are just running them like any other creature out of the MM. So are vampires, beholders, or any other legendary monster.

>>50616887
Unfortunately I have no use for a sprite token of my character's portrait Because none of the players have seen it yet or likely will soon, in character or out of character.

>>50617075
I don't have those same problems with rakshasas, vampires, fey, etc. There's something about a winged, huge, fire-breathing lizard that just confounds me to come up with personalities and motivations.

I enjoy the way I can use a rakshasa for the entire campaign and it's up in the air whether anyone figures out that multiple NPCs they've been manipulated by are actually this same rakshasa pushing them toward fulfilling a prophecy.

I might just put the gold dragon's shapeshifting ability onto other types so I can play the dragon first-person.

>>50617129

That would work fine. You don't even need to transfer the shape shifting thing, you could make a special magic item for that dragon that it made/found/stole to give it the same effect. Could also serve as a clue to especially clever players if you wanted.

File: 1329985598067.jpg (447KB, 781x750px) Image search: [Google]

447KB, 781x750px

>tfw you try to help Middle Finger of Vecna not be so shitty and they insist bad design and balance is just part of their vision

Sometimes, they actually take the recommendations and unfuck their shit, and but then most of the time they just barrel on full steam away without understand how awful they are. And it's a real pity, because they come up with some neat skeletons for archetypes and the like, but then you have to manually rebuild them in Natural Crit.

File: fc4507ff15fd09fe999ab29204e82980-d618umu.jpg (281KB, 525x1350px) Image search: [Google]

281KB, 525x1350px

>>50616008
I've always wanted to use Remorhazes since reading the early R.A. Salvatore books with the fight between bruenor and one.
Finally got the opportunity last weekend and it was amazing, the players had never fought one and haven't completely read the MM so the encounter was a blast.

The fighter was lucky enough to quaff a potion of invulnerability before the actual Melee and just survived on 14hp after a swallow.

10/10 monster

>>50617129
The monster manual does have some information on their character, so for example Blue and Green ones are schemers, so I think they definitely would be fitting for plots other than "they're greedy".

>>50617199
>know my party will be fighting a remorhaz eventually
>already familiar with its stats
>going to have to melee it even though I know it's a bad idea just so everyone else learns it's a bad idea in advance of trying it themselves

>>50616902
>no u

Anyone got tips for a DM for 1-on-1 D&D?

>>50617336
When they ask you to put on your wizard robe and hat, you say yes.

>>50617254
Alright, I have an idea for a way to make the dragon at least fit my villain style.

Let's say I take a green dragon, and it somehow steals the periapts of a couple of alhoons to force them to be its plane-shifting cat's paws. The alhoons are obviously going to work to get out from under the dragon's control, and the dragon understands this. He sets them up for a big heist he doesn't expect them to survive, but that he can grab the macguffin while the alhoons are fighting their pursuers, killing the pursuers (the PCs) and the alhoons at the same time.

Does that sound like a dragon's plan that would still allow me to use the dragon personally? The dragon doesn't fight alone, though it doesn't care if its minions die. It could make off with the macguffin, forcing the PCs to pursue a new target. The PCs could retrieve the macguffin, forcing the dragon to plot against them if it survives.

>>50617282
Im an eternal DM so i wont know the woes of trying to play ignorant, but it would be nice to be in a campaign out of my element, our group plays alot of Dresden files but i've never been in a game and each time we try someone flakes.

>>50617336
always keep them guessing/asking questions, 1-on-1s can be great but you need to feed the plot and info to them at a rate where they try to do alot at once but you have to counter balance it with drawing focus on 1 point at a time, every 1-on-1 ive had has ended abruptly how ever, i hope yours goes well

>>50617371
I'll keep that in-mind. I know him pretty well, so i think i can provoke/prompt him to be in that kind of mindset. He's a new player so that might help.

Any tips for scaling combat?

>>50617500
yeah, try not to use CR as your basis, CR is a lose guideline. Look at the damage and conditions, if 1 creature can stun/lock down an adventurer in a party based game it isnt a huge threat
but in a situation where its one guy and maybe a npc follower that 1 lock down will 50/50 kill him out right.

Also try stay away from beasts/monsters as they dont really "loot and beat up" what can be treated as a soft reset or a huge plot hook (bandits beat the shit out of you and stole you "X" super important item.. how are you gonna fix this)

>>50617500
If you give the PC multiple initiatives he can fight a larger number of enemies without getting dogpiled and beaten into the ground.

What is your group's name?

>>50617648
Winkle's Watchers

>>50617582
>stay away from beasts/monsters as they dont really "loot and beat up"
Oh thats good. Okay, thats super helpful, gives me a better idea of how to build my setting too.

>>50617621
I think that would work well. Probably at max, 2-3 intiatives.

I was thinking that whenever there's a big 1-on-1 duel between the PC and a strong enemy, that re-rolling initiative every turn to see who goes first every turn would be alot of fun. I don't think that was my idea, i remember hearing it somewhere.
Do you recommend giving the player an NPC follower?

>>50617789
i dont reccomend a full leveled adventurer follower, maybe some kind of familiar, maybe later on down the track a floating skull that mocks enemies and provides useful commentary.
For sure have him have/make friends, you want him to feel like he is making change but not feel as if he is alone in a world of stale commoners and Bad guys

>>50617336
think about it more like a game like fire emblem. the player has an MC that they roleplay with, and give them a small group of support characters who have their own personalities (that you as the dm role play) but that the player controls in combat situations.

is there any fun Christmas themed adventures for to run ?

>>50617789
>re-rolling initiative every turn
>I don't think that was my idea, i remember hearing it somewhere

DMG p. 270, "Speed Factor"

>>50617929
Curse of Strahd. It's great for Orphans.

File: make b8 gr8 again.jpg (158KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 1000x1000px

>>50615126

is it bad that I've been playing 5th ed since it came out and I still haven't read all the books 100%

I feel like I have a strong grasp on the game but
I also feel like I should read them all through.

Also, what are you Favorite magic items? Mine is the immovable rod, as a player and DM I've had stupid amounts of fun with one.. but when you have two...

File: ok kid.jpg (92KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 900x900px

>>50615268
>magically conjuring something makes the item conjured magic

>>50618007
Its make a lot of sense for an arcane archer to be able to enchant their ammo in such a basic way though, and tying it to the ammo conjuring feature is a really clean way of handling it.

File: Deck the Dungeons.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>50617929
Not an adventure, but some holiday-themed character options that some anon made and posted a few days ago

File: 11165084_987274497958238_2290442413834716448_o.jpg (254KB, 1218x778px) Image search: [Google]

254KB, 1218x778px

I'm thinking of starting a new group with some new friends I've met from theatre. I've only ever DM'd 2e but it seems like the might enjoy 5e better considering it's newer and none of them have roleplayed(lol) before.

File: 1295856010126.png (200KB, 370x370px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 370x370px

>>50618007
>a 7th level ability that otherwise does absolutely fuck all
>can't even be assed to make magic ammo for the sake of resistance and sharing with the party
>even that would basically be a ribbon since a 7th level fighter would all but certainly have a magic weapon by that point
>anything other than "hurr i haf moer awwowz"

>>50618042
This anon is good. Like real good. Do you have any more from them? Or are you out there anon? I like your style.

>>50617172
>that storm/elemental/I can't remember archetype that was actually somewhat decent until one feature right at the end where they decided 'You know what? Fuck this, it's too balanced. Let's add in a capstone feature that completely breaks everything. Because capstones are supposed to be ridiculously overpowered, right? Oh, but, we'll make the other possible abilities at this level so shit you won't choose anything else. There we go, job's a good'un."

>>50618081
5e is great for about a year, then it becomes really boring.

>>50618042
saw it and loved it
the idea is to run some adventure with these classes

>>50618042
I love all of these. Especially the fighter, druid and cleric.

At least you chucklefucks have been reining in your autism.

>>50616825
I understand certain things needing altered to fit with the new system, but that wasn't exactly what I had meant. As I said, I'll go over things a bit more thoroughly when I can. As far as the dispeling thing goes, they suffered from a -4 penalty on attempts to dispel a spell with a mystery (shadows fade) and/or a mystery with a spell (dispel magic) in the original.

As far as left out things, first that jumps to mind is liquid night

>>50618227
Maybe you're just shit.

>>50618275
No they haven't.

>>50616824
ToEE was 3.5, you fucking moron.

>>50618218
YUP. Just look at the latest fucking thing they tossed up. I'm literally having to argue with them that giving your allies +1d4 + Cha mod on their damage at the expense of your Action does not scale well at all. Palm legit believes that's something that stays relevant up to level 20.

And having a level 18 feature that's just the War cleric 17th level feature except you're still resistant to magic weapons. And comparing it to the Bear totem instead of the fucking feature they literally to wrote without "from non-magical weapons," while also adding the ability to swap it at will to whatever resistance you need.

>"A bear totem gains a much stronger form of this ability at 3rd level, and by 18th can rage at will: I'm not seeing how this is OP."

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>50618285
>As far as the dispeling thing goes, they suffered from a -4 penalty on attempts to dispel a spell with a mystery (shadows fade) and/or a mystery with a spell (dispel magic) in the original.

ah yes, that. modifiers and penalties take a back seat in 5e. if anything, i should make it so the check is made at disadvantage instead of applying a -4 penalty to the check, but yeah, ill concede that point. Still, its not necessarily game breaking when done this way.

idk, you have a good point. and there is precedent for there to be poor interactions with shadow magic and regular magic.

>liquid night
it was hard to justify that spell as a cantrip when youre so limited in options in 5e. it likely wasnt going to be chosen by anyone, even though its a really cool ability. Id have to figure out a way to make it more universally useful beyond being able to glow a certain color in the dark.

File: 7227-30747-16022.jpg (22KB, 640x394px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 640x394px

>>50618096
>being this mad over a ribbon ability on a playtest class

>>50618227
Explain.

>>50618333
The 1d4+cha mod damage could be relevant.
That's up to +7.5 damage per attack.
If you have a fighter, they can make up to 5 attacks at level 20. More reasonably, 4 attacks at level 11, with action surge giving them an extra 3 attacks and possibly haste giving them another attack.
+7.5 damage per attack would mean quite a bit.
A paladin should get PAM, that gives them up to four attacks per round at level 5. They would get four uses of it in a round.
Monks could hit four times in a turn with flurry of blows.
And so on. Eldritch blast can hit four times, an upcasted scorching ray can hit several times...
The problem is that it relies heavily on party composition.
It might be a decent ability, actually.

Yeah. If it's a Cleric, then it shouldn't be a thing because clerics are full casters. If it's a barbarian, I'm not really sure what's going on there. What use does a barbarian get from that?

Those problems seem pretty minor compared to what the barbarian type got which was 'you can move, free disengage, you get a free attack with advantage, you automatically prone the target on hit, and then...'
.. Something like that.

>>50618389
Well, he's blatantly autist.

If I use twinned spell with hex, and one of the targets dies, can I use a bonus actions to use the second hex on a different target again?
What happens if both die, can I take two bonus actions to target two different enemies again?

Damn it, I've been looking for an hour. Where are the options for creating characters beyond 1st level?

>>50618454
I believe the bonus action switch part of it makes it ineligible for twinned spell.

>>50618389
These have no friends and no social skills byt they still gotta try.

>>50618477
Are you a retard?

>>50618454
Hex is a concentration spell, you can only have one casting of it up at a time.

File: 59aab59c9530b2ada9ef46ac8da960e0.jpg (2MB, 2550x938px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2550x938px

Look at this unbalanced shitheap about 10 times longer than any other race description
http://pastebin.com/CU4jgugT

What can I do to unfuck it? Broken Lords are one of my favorite fantasy races but I can't find a way to represent them without it ending up as overpowered shit or not as they should be.

http://endlesslegend.gamepedia.com/Broken_Lords

>>50618431
Once you learn the system, you realize how shallow it is, and how much it punishes players who try to do something unique with their action economy.

Combat is either stagnant, stationary, and stifling, or a really shitty game of mother may I with the dm.

>>50618502
>Are you a retard?
I saw them once in, I think, the DMG, but I can't find them again. They're not in the table of contents or the index that I can see.

>>50618477
1. Create the character
2. Give it the class features that it gets up to its level
3. ?????
4. Profit

>>50618503
What? But I thought you could use twinned spell on spells like haste?

>>50618477

You make a level 1 character.

Then you level them up like anyone else.

>>50618520
Fine, don't help me.

>>50618435
It's a Fighter archetype. That's Strength and Constitution and Charisma reliant. That only uses Charisma for this ability and another special Action that lets make one attack and heal allies within 60 ft 1d8 + Cha mod if you hit with.

Neither of which are tied to any sort of resource, but rather at free use all day long. So you turn into a Fighter whose only purpose is to either not attack and give the rest of your party 1d4 + Cha damage for a round or hope you hit with an attack to heal them.

>>50618524
You can, ignore >>50618503 as they apparently can't read.

Anyone have instances where pcs swing way above their level?
My level 5 ancients paladin soloed two vampire spawn, except the 4 points of damage the ek did.
Pam/sentinal w/ high strength

>>50618548
Sometimes happens. Roll with it.

>>50618508
>healing can only be done by ingesting Dust
>you don't live on Auriga so there's no Dust anywhere
balanced

>>50618524
Oh yea, I forgot how twinned spell works, and I'm not exactly sure how that would work with hex. I'd probably ask your dm how they'd rule that.

>>50618536
>>50618520
Nah, he's a retard that's asking about the Starting at Higher Level chart from the DMG.

>>50618516
Page 38.

>1-4th
Starting equipment
>5th-10th
500gp + 1d10*25gp, normal starting equipment
>11th-16th
5000gp + 1d10*250gp, two uncommon magic items, normal starting equipment
>17th-20th
>20000gp + 1d10*250gp, two uncommon magic items, one rare magic item, normal starting equipment

This changes depending on Low Magic, Normal Magic, and High Magic campaigns.

>>50618538
What is there to help you with? To create a higher level character you create a character at higher level. Sorry that I'm unfamiliar with your brand of autism, but this isn't a hard thing to understand

>>50618516
Create as you would a 1st level character, then advance them as appropriate. Take heed of your proficiency level.

>>50618564
Yeah but dust conversion "magic" exists so It'd be easy to argue you're just using magic as raw power to make more of it.

>>50618612
That really should be in the table of contents.

>>50618614
>being a whiny insulting cunt
>getting the rules wrong while doing so
k e k

>>50618539
>infinite healing if you have a bag of rats
Oh fucking no

And, honestly, if anything, the granting others extra damage sounds overpowered.
Dump strength, you don't need it.
Get charisma. Max it out.
Focus on giving everyone +7.5 damage, on a team where everybody focuses on getting lots of attacks (I'd recommend paladins).

It's too dependent on your teammates, however, and the healing ability is just stupid. Maybe I should sign up to join the debate.

>>50618512
How does it punish unique actions?
Sounds like you haven't been using tactical combat.
Sounds like you or your DM is just shit.

File: 1480904763356-tg.jpg (54KB, 960x631px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 960x631px

What is the most ridiculous characyer you can think of?

[Spoiler] I really want to make a Skeleton Pugilist that wanders the earth, fighting the good fight and drinking milk like it was beer

>>50618575
I'm the DM. But I'm still unsure if there is any official ruling.

From what I've found on sageadvice is that you can twin hex but obviously not both on the same target, but I don't find anything about the bonus action to target someone again part.

>>50618634
You sound mad, anon

>>50618512
>combat in a grey void against faceless enemies is the only thing in Dungeons and Dragon

Not that 5e's combat couldn't use a bit of spicing up, but, dude...

File: 1337296033322.jpg (141KB, 800x810px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 800x810px

>>50618658
Says the faggot bitching at some poor retard and not even knowing the actual answer to the question you were making fun of him for asking. If anyone's salty, Anon, it's (you).

>>50618656
>but I don't find anything about the bonus action to target someone again part.
I'd probably rule it would take a separate bonus action to move each separate instance of hex, either that or the hex that you twinned just disappears once its target is dead, although that would be a little harsher on the sorcerer/warlock. I don't think there is any specific rules about that combo though.

>>50618650
holy shit this looks like I was drunk while posting this

>>50618636
http://www.middlefingerofvecna.com/2016/12/hero-of-legacy.html#comment-form

Careful, anon. It starts with just trying to help them unfuck one archetype. And then you end up bashing your brains out because the fuckwits are terrible at half the shit they do and then go on to fail to accept half of the criticism they get.

>>50618687
>I'd probably rule it would take a separate bonus action to move each separate instance of hex
Yeah that's probably how I wanted rule it. Seems pretty neat only using one spellpoint for 2 hexed enemies.

Btw I'm about to play a Sorclock for the first time soon, any spells you would recommend taking? Scorching ray seems like a fine choice combined with hex if you quicken it and still shoot your eldritch blast. Other than that I will probably take shield, feather fall and haste.

>>50618702
You sound upset.

Are there any suggested rules for Gestalt yet?

Thinking of Memeing it up.

File: lake-hurwitz-lake-hurwitz-ao-levi.jpg (699KB, 1440x1920px) Image search: [Google]

699KB, 1440x1920px

>>50618695
its okay anon we all get drunk and post sometimes

>>50618735
no.

dont.

Do you allow Barbarians to punch themselves in the face or inflict self harm to keep rage going? I do, but I like to implement diminishing returns, like it works for 1~2 rounds max.

>>50618753
What in the actual fuck.

>>50618647
>Okay dm, I want to dive through the ogre's legs, rip a torch out of its sconce on the wall ten feet behind it behind him, and throw it at the ogre.
>Oh that provoked an opportunity attack? Okay, that makes sense. With my AC of 18, the ogre hits. That's 20 damage. Yikes, I'm in bad shape now.
>Okay so I grab the torch and throw it at the troll!
>Sweet, even with my Dex roll, I hit, how much damage do I do?
>1d4? Because it's an improvised weapon? What?

A champion fighter watches this interaction and decides to just stand still in his turns.

>>50618735
Just pick a class, and pick more than one archetype and receive benefits from both.

>>50618762
i see nothing wrong with any of this.

are you legit a retard? im so sorry anon, i thought you were faking it.

>>50618753
I let Barbarians continue the rage so long as they are taking direct aggressive actions.

Enemy is 40ft away from you but because of difficult terrain and obstacles, you can't get to them in one movement, I'm not going to deny you your rage because you had to dash. Seems silly to charge across the field, foaming at the mouth, vault a broken tree and skid to a halt as their feet, axe in hand and decide you feel much calmer now.

>>50618793
You see nothing wrong with the edition being written to encourage nothing but "I stand still and attack it" over and over and over again?

>>50618812
maybe your example was really bad? why the fuck would throwing a torch be more effective than attacking with, you know, a real fucking weapon?

File: DS-персонажи-Dark-Souls-фэндомы-Taurus-Demon-3081216.jpg (577KB, 1246x1934px) Image search: [Google]

577KB, 1246x1934px

>>50618762
what did you want to happen in this scenario?

>>50618812
like, at least douse the troll in oil before hand or something for fucks sake. none of this stupid self strawmanning scenarios.

>>50618762
>expecting a thrown torch to do significant damage
You're a very special player, aren't you?

>>50618702
>you can use unarmed strikes!
Even at 1d12 this is useless, because it doesn't use GWM or a maul 2d6 is better. Also magical items are better than fists. However, it's better than a longsword if you're going sword and board. By +1 damage. Great.
>str+con to AC! But no shields.
But considering you're barely attacking anyway, you should have a shield.
So, useless except once you get 1d12s, where you'll no longer need a shield unless you have magical armour.
>action to give everyone like lots of damage!
As stated. If you're in a suitable party, this is overpowered. ALL weapon and ALL spell attacks, alongside affecting yourself if you power surge or get a bonus attack. Oh, yes, you get a bonus attack. This is relevant at all levels, but especially level 5. You will just stand there being a pretty buffbot.
>level 7
Fighters are not supposed to get good level 7 abilities unless they deserve it. This is too overpowered to deserve it. Fuck off.
>level 10
>you can at-will heal people as an action by punching something!
Fuck off. This is 5e, see the 'why can't you have teleportation as a cantrip'? Because, aside from power levels not allowing you to teleport at level 0, you are assumed to be able to heal if you can also heal and punch. Otherwise you'd carry a bag of rats to punch with you.
>level 15
Don't wear armour, fly. Yeah, I get it, you're trying to emulate a character from that one card game. But, this is fighter, so fucking don't unless the rest of the class is UP.

>>50618762
DMG pp 271-272 Tumble or Overrun or Shive Aside to move through a creatures space safely.

Is it a troll or an ogre? Because hitting a troll with a torch to deal fire damage and stop the regen is very useful

An ogre? Try same page to Climb on its back and attack its head, I'd probably give advantage

>>50618812

This:
>>50618820
Your example is stupid. The PC should have done someting smart like covering the ogre in oil, THEN it would do massive damage.

You can't expect to do great damage just because you're not standing still and attacking, you have to do something actually smart.

File: calcium.jpg (969KB, 1200x4800px) Image search: [Google]

969KB, 1200x4800px

>>50618650

>>50618820
>>50618835
Imagine any scenario with improvised actions. Then remember, 1d4 and likely no multi attack. There's literally no incentive to be creative.

File: a68.png (301KB, 520x678px) Image search: [Google]

301KB, 520x678px

>>50618860

>>50618812
This >>50618820

The stats for a torch are really low. It does 1d4+1 fire damage, and its always improvised. It'd be useful if he had tossed oil on it first and the thing was vulnerable to fire, but otherwise it's more like he saw a kitchen knife hanging on the wall, risked life and limb to get at it, and was surprised when it did as much as a normal dagger.

Also, diving through the Ogres legs probably shouldn't be an AoO by RAW unless you leave its reach. You can circle around an enemy just fine.

So I may have goobered

eldritch knight lvl 16 kind of sucks... So I gave him an artifact quest that took the party 4 sessions in the dungeon.

It's a rusty blade whose name was forgotten. It also grants lesser time stop, giving 1 bonus turn worth of time once a day or he can expend 8 hit die to cast it again that day.


Basically I've created dio

Lorewise he seems op as fuck, but it doesn't add too much to him in combat since he was so underwhelming before.

>>50618872
so... did you goobered or not? is there a problem?

>>50618702
>>50618845
Continuing on, because post hit text limit.
The level 15 ability shouldn't be insanely game-changing such as extra movement and flight if the rest of the archetype is overpowered. Which it is.

Finally, level 18
>level 18
The bonus action to change resistance is great utility, but not insane. Still, this is gaining the benefits of a raging barbarian permanently.
I think this would actually be allowable, if slightly unfun for treading on the barbarian's toes. ... If the rest of the class wasn't a fucking 3 level overpowered dip for 'I'm going to stand here and be a fucking buffbot all day'.

The whole thing is broken. There's a few 'this would be okay if the rest wasn't broken' but there isn't even any more fluffy less combat useful level features it should have.

I don't even know if I want to bother getting near them, because I could never even begin to make them fix this entire thing.

>>50618891
Not yet but I feel like I've given him an artifact that is too powerful

>>50618859
>>50618835
Add oil to the scenario. It now takes two turns, and does the 1d4+5 damage.

Thanks 5e!

>>50618861
For the last time, Improvised weapons do 1d4 damage if they don't resemble anything.

A torch is called out specifically under items for doing 1d4+1 damage. If you toss a lantern at someone, that resembles a torch, so same deal.

If you throw a small rock, that's 1d4. If you're throwing a boulder, base it off the damage that it resembles a gargantuan sling stone, or the head of a large maul.

And that's just RAW. If you want to encourage it further, you can have such attacks do extra effects like knocking them prone or blinding them for a turn.

>>50618861
>Imagine any scenario with improvised actions.

yeah, okay..

hmm... uhuh..

yep.

i still see nothing wrong with it because im not fucking retarded.

>>50618904
1d4+5 and theyre on fire, dealing more damage each turn. 2 actions for something that keeps giving is a good trade. frankly idk why im still replying. your head is so far up your ass and you lack any kind of imagination that you cant even think of a way improvised actions can be worthwhile.

>>50618936
Read the rules for oil again. Their is no ongoing damage unless you stand in the fire of a puddle.

>>50618904
1d4+6 actually. Then double that if they're vulnerable to fire. Then consider if they're vulnerable to fire but resistant to mundane weapons.

Suddenly dealing 2d4+12 rather than 1d8+4 cut in half seems more worth it.

File: VeryWorriedLaughter.png (452KB, 1053x770px) Image search: [Google]

452KB, 1053x770px

>>50618735
You really shouldn't, but if you have to it's really no more complicated than gaining features from two classes at a time. Like, I'm not even sure what you're asking here.

>>50618953
Except past level 5 multiattacks, even normal attacking will eclipse it. Remember, you funny get to multi attack with most of these items.

>>50618845
>>50618898
Pretty much. This might be the shittiest that I've seen from them in a while, but it's far from abnormal. Basically, they have some neat ideas and some of the archetype concepts they come up with or just steal from 3.P are interesting, but the execution is almost always just garbage. And discussions with them are either actually productive or like talking to Poo in Loo tech support.

>>50618948
>Read the rules for oil again.

nigga, just fucking stop. take your autism elsewhere. read the damn book and stfu because you have no argument.

theyre on fire for 2 rounds, dealing 5 fire damage each round. thats in the PHB. jesus fuck im getting baited so hard.

>>50618973
Throwing an oil flask and torch is both just a single attack each, so that means its taking you one turn instead of two.

Still better off dealing 16 damage rather than 8 if they resist weapons but are vulnerable to fire.

It's not going to be universally better, but if it was, why would anyone carry swords instead of torches and oil?

File: 82414f6ec31bbb93a6ed100d011bd5d5.jpg (22KB, 385x720px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 385x720px

>>50618903
well he can't attack while stopping time can he? like you did read time stop? right?
if you gave him a sword that gives him 3 + (2 per short rest) free turns to action surge and unload on an enemy that can't defend himself because time is stopped, then yeah, you gave him too much. but if you gave him a sword he can use to escape anything, avoid hazards, move into position, etc, but not directly harm other creatures, then that sounds pretty cool to me.
next level he gets two action surges a short rest, so you're.... basically.... giving him like 12 attacks whenever he wants against a defenseless foe. more if he has haste up. thats like... probably not what a fighter needs.

>>50618978
People like that are legitimately retarded but don't think they are. It's like arguing against a brick wall.

I want to make character proficient with weapons and tools suited to its background instead of class, skills taking proficiency from both, equipment purely from background.
Is that fine?
Basically, I want character to make sense from roleplaying standpoint.
Is it ok to do that by additional initial customization? Or is it just one of those things for DM to decide?

>>50618978
You have no reading comprehension. Seriously, read the rules for oil.

>>50618973
Well maybe you should stop dropping your magical sword to throw torches at things and only use improvised weapons for specific situations that call for it. Say, 'This creature is vulnerable to silver!' 'Oh no, we have no silver weapons! Oh, wait, we have silver knives and forks and spoons given to us by a noble sometime back! We could try those!'

5e is sensible. You don't get superpowers for doing something flashy, though your DM may fiat for rule of cool.

It's all about your DM trying to fit in scenarios that a hero could think of to use to their advantage. 'Oh, maybe we should destroy this bridge before the orcs get across instead of charging across and attacking!'

>>50619020
Sure? If the players are okay with it, why not.

>>50619009
No. Using an oil flask is explicitly a whole action.

>>50619055
>uncork
>Pour out
>re-cork and stow
I can understand that as being an action.

>Picking it up and chunking it at a troll.
I would rule that as an attack.

>>50619020
Backgrounds in the book never give you weapon proficiency, but as a DM I would be fine with it as long as you asked first. But I'm a pretty "let them do" DM.
I dont exactly understand your post though.

>>50619044
You might call it sensible, but I highly doubt you've played or dmed for a martial for more than 3 levels. Doing the same thing over and over again because it is never viable to spice things up is boring.

>>50619078
I agree, it's retarded, but the designers of five eee thought it would be broken off you could just throw oil flasks at people. They were so terrified of improvised actions being good that they made the times for them oppressively bad.

Mfw I have no idea who the chucklefuck autists are.

>>50619105
Did you even read his post or are you just that intent on baiting

>>50619085
That's because your DM is bad or you're not picking up the little ideas your DM is dropping you, then.

It's not easy, but a good DM can make even playing a champion fun.

Yes, if your DM doesn't spice things up, you won't have a lot to do other than just attack as a champion.

>>50618955
What's wrong with Gestalt? Gestalt is for stupid one-off stupidly high powered campaigns right? We want to do one of those since we never did one when they were popular around 3.5.

>>50619127
Other games have managed to make combat spicy without having to have a good dm. The fact that so many criticisms of five eee are excused with a simple "you suck or your dm sucks"is itself a huge sign of the weakness this edition.

>>50619160
Yeah, he's just baiting.

>>50619160
>>/4eg/

>>50619085
breh i've played a purple dragon knight and had fun, my good friend is playing a champion and he has a lot of fun. hes probably the most heroic or what have you member of the party and always does crazy stuff. i'm playing a thief and yeah i have a lot of skills but i have fun in combat too.

>>50619175
No, I seriously believe 5e didn't do everything better than every other game. I get that that is treason, but you'll have to accept it's a pretty popular opinion.

>>50619180
And I'm bored. Post back in a year newbie.

>>50619146
If it's just for a short-term high-powered memefest, then I take it back. Knock yourself out.
Again, though, it should be pretty simple.

>>50619193
>5e is the most popular edition
>popular opinion is that it sucks
Yeah ok

>>50618762
oh look it's an autist

everyone wave hello

>>50619193
Your only example has been the player throwing a smaller weapon instead of just swinging their bigger one.

What is your complaint about this scenario? People have pointed out cases where it's more beneficial, like if you need a silver dagger or fire because your sword won't work, but why should a dagger hanging on the wall always be more viable than the weapon your character has?

>>50619203
our current campaign, in which i'm a thief and hes a champion, has been going on for over a year, and thats not our only one we've done. but idk why i'm responding to bait.

>>50619223
We've been trying to wave goodbye but he's not getting the hint

As a grappler babarian, do I take bear or Wolf as my totem spirit?

Bear would me let tank better of course.
But wolf would allow me to not knock prone my grappled targets so that my allies get advantage. This way the ranged attackers don't get disadvantage but the enemies have an easier time escaping the grapple, seeing as they don't get disadvantage on dex saving throws.

>>50619222
I never said it sucks anon. Read that post again, and consider your standards on sucking.

File: 3470289s213a5321d2f154a42s12j1d0.gif (2MB, 498x273px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 498x273px

>>50619193
Here's your icon.

>>50619241
Bear for solo survivability, Wolf for teamplay.

>>50619226
Any improvised action will deal 1d4 generally, and the rules put in for non standard combat actions will almost never deal more than a normal attack. This, combined with movement in combat being incredibly punished creates the shitty martial combat of standing still and attacking over and over again.

File: improvising an action.jpg (100KB, 527x324px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 527x324px

>>50619279
Sounds like the problem's with you.

>>50619279
>because shoving, grappling, disarming, ect are not things you can do.
>being this fucking dense

just... just leave, anon. nobody wants you here.
hell, YOU dont want you here.

>>50619279
The action economy any other time than early level makes your point completely invalid

I don't think you've ever played a martial in 5e...

>>50619160
Then, the DM should run 4e.

5e is designed to give the DM more room for snap decisions that are meaningful. I've found that it's easier to add in a fight-relevant item to a fight in 5e than in 4e, but 4e is much better balanced and will give you something even if you make a very basic fight.

>>50619203
>>50619193
Not any of those people, but go back to whatever demiplane you came from.
We do not deny 5eg has flaws, but we also do not deny that you can enjoy it despite those flaws with just a tiny bit of effort on the DM's and Player's part.

>>50619279
but why would improvising a stick to throw at someone do more damage than hitting them with a sword? if they're already standing in oil, or you already doused them in oil, or the rogue already did that, sure, throw a torch at them. if they're standing at a window 20 stories up, push them out the window. if you're on a bridge over a lava flow, why not shove them off. if its something weak to fire, say a flesh golem, it might be worth it to attack them with fire. but otherwise, what do you want? weapons are made for killing, thats what they're for. creativity exists for making use of situations, not automatically being better than hitting someone with a sword.
from time to time i creatively move around the battlefield to avoid taking opportunity attacks, and thats cool, but otherwise combat is pretty damn fast in 5e, and hitting someone with a sharp stick however many times has worked for humans for thousands of years. idk what you want except (you)'s

>>50619279
Improvised weapons deal damage based on what weapon they closest resemble. If you think a table resembles a sling pebble rather than a huge greatclub, that's your problem.

And you can still circle around enemies without issue. Or take a tea for two levels in Rogue of you want to skirmish more effectively. Plus you can always Shove an enemy away and then run to someone else if you don't want to disengage.

There are lots of options here even before getting into having a great DM who adds more stuff, but even just an understanding of the rules should let you see plenty of options.

This is why people are calling you bad, because you're ignoring what's there and complaining that throwing a Rock doesn't deal 40 force damage or that opportunity attacks are a thing when you leave an enemy's reach

>>50619310
>Disarming being relevant.
Grappling I'll give you, because grappling/shoving is extremely powerful. But it hardly breaks the monotony when it too becomes routine. Instead of every combat being "I stand still and attack" it becomes "I grapple/shove then stand still and attack"

I'll post what I posted in the last thread for the r-tards here that don't know how to combat other than I hit things, and then complain that the rules only let them hit things.

http://media.wizards.com/2014/downloads/dnd/TuckersKobolds.pdf
http://slyflourish.com/5e_encounter_building.html
http://dungeonsmaster.com/2012/03/tips-for-making-encounters-more-interesting/

>>50615688
Fuck, there's plenty of room for awesome abilities in this.
One thing that comes to mind is a support ability where you infuse an ally frontliner with wild magic as a reaction, when they take lethal/drops to 0, and they can act on their next turn before dropping.
It'll probably be a pain to balance, but it totally sets up a sick mechanic, mechanically and thematically.

>>50619241
Battlerager for shanking people with your elbows.

>>50619351
Or they could play a system with good combat.

5e is like pizza hut. It's not special or good in any way, but it doesn't suck too badly in any way unless you start experimenting with real pizza places.

>>50619351

thank you based anon, but these autistic r-tards arent going to read that, theyre too busy baitin this entire thread.

>>50619350
oh so youre just complaining that martials suck? this again? really? well fuck you, buddy. im done with this shit. peace, nignogs, im out.

>>50619350
And if throwing a torch did more damage than a sword, you'd still be complaining, because rather than 'I stand still and attack' you'd get 'i stand still land throw torches'.

Perhaps the problem is that you are too obsessed with optimal things and don't try and mix it up, rather than the options for mixing it up not existing.

>>50619377
>Or they could play a system with good combat.

Recommend me one and I'll try it. I'm genuinely curious what everyone else's benchmark for "good combat" is compared to D&D, or why D&D apparently fails so hard at it.

File: ettercaps.jpg (639KB, 3508x2480px) Image search: [Google]

639KB, 3508x2480px

Ettercap guy from yesterday. I managed to fuck up the picture I drew for my players.
Feels bad, but hey, they're gonna kill them en-masse anyways, I suppose..

If I have 20 strenght and the tavern brawler feat, my unarmed attacks always deal a flat 10 damage right?

>>50619406
Is that Zoidberg without his shell?

>>50619396
Being punished for mixing it up is bad design anon. Ideally unusual actions would offer equal, but different benefits to usual actions, such that it took serious consideration and tactical thought to evaluate which was better in each situation.

But five eee was designed to avoid this ideal, and issued go for the overly simple. So stationary attacking is the best move in 99%of situations, and you'll get punished for doing otherwise.

>>50619431
it is now.
I was wondering what personality their leader would have....

>>50616690
>the other shoots down our rogue after our bard hits her with a critical fail on his crossbow shot
>our bard hits her with a critical fail
Please don't do thi.

>>50615152
In a way, it's a problem with the Fighter base class; there aren't enough subclass-feature-gaps to do anything very interesting with.

>>50619429
Tavern Brawler makes your unarmed strikes deal 1d4 base damage instead of a flat 1. Adding your Strength mod to this, your unarmed strikes would deal 1d4+5, for a range of 6-9. Not sure where you're getting 10 damage.

>>50619434
No, you're being punished for doing something stupid, like sliding between an armed creatures legs and throwing a large match at it that would bounce off like any other fucking stick.

Improvisation anon, what Int were you playing with? Is it Int 8.

>>50619404
Burning wheel.
4e
Star wars (new)
Riddle of steel

>>50619453
Oh I read something wrong then

>>50619434
Unusual actions can easily be better than standard ones if you actually think about what you're doing. Clearly an improvised action that is not as good as attacking will be less effective than attacking. Your argument boils down to "I can't think outside the box, so this edition is bad". I'm sorry that you severely lack creativity for anything other than baiting, but it's pretty clear that you don't belong here.

>>50619465
more like int 6, probably less from int damage from being dropped on the head a few times.

>>50619464
Could you do the same in 2e, 3xe, 4e?

>>50619404
>>50619475

RuneQuest 6 AKA Mythras is also pretty decent.

>>50619434
Were you just trying to distract it?

>>50619475
>Burning Wheel
Is Mouseguard an okay replacement? I've always heard it described as Burning Wheel with mice.

>4e
Been there done that. No thanks

>Star Wars (new)
Which one is that exactly, my group was looking into trying a Star Wars RPG after our current 5e campaign is done.

>Riddle of Steel
Sounds cool. What is it?

>>50619434
And this cycles back to having a bad DM to put opportunities in.

Shoving someone can be better than just attacking, either knocking them prone or pushing them somewhere hazardous.

Using an improvised weapon can also be better, if it's either something the monster is weak to like fire, or if it's something suitably large and damaging like a table or a boulder.

Sounds to me like the problem is less that 5e doesn't have these viable options, and more that 99% of the time you've been fighting things in barren dungeon rooms with only torches against enemies where torches aren't a great option.

You're also only being 'punished' for not being careful. If after rolling under the Ogre you had shoved them away or knocked them prone, you probably wouldn't have taken 20 damage. Or if you had gone for any other torch in the room.

And again, this is before you get into CMs actively improving thongs like allowing an acrobatics check to avoid an opportunity act a k by rolling past something large, or giving improvised weapons extra effects like a free shove or a chance to blind.

Stop complaining that running past someone and throwing a torch at them isn't always as good of an option.

>>50619476
See how easy that was, improvanon?

>>50619540
>CMs

Can we stop replying to the idiot already?
Let's talk about the Monk. Why do you hate/love the monk? What do you want in the UA?

>>50619509
>Mouse guard
I haven't played that, but it could be good. From lurking, teegee had nothing but good things to say about it.

>Star wars.
The ones made by fantasy flight games. Edge of the empire, age of rebellion, and the Jedi one. All three are compatible with each other.

>Riddle of steel
Dice pool based combat supposedly based on research into martial arts, pretty fun system.

File: 1981290457152.png (37KB, 122x157px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 122x157px

>>50619549

>>50619566
FIX THE AVATAR RIPOFF REEEEEE

File: 6570ce8a68bbff4e4e0dd901c6ae0816.jpg (64KB, 560x792px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 560x792px

Real talk, just how bad are dual-wielding paladins actually, even though they can't take TWF fighting style?

>Dex
>dat Defense fighting style for +1 AC
>Oath of the Ancients
>two light finesse weapons for double the smite chances
>cause who cares about one die's size or a +STR/DEX once when you can add multiple d8s on a crit

>>50619572
>Fantasy Flight Star Wars
>dice pools

fuck that, ew

>>50619489
Probably would have about the same results, except 2e didn't have opportunity attacks, but you'd also be giving up all your attacks for the torch.

3.5 would have similar results, except probably harsher penalties for an improvised weapon.

4E would have the torch doing on-level level damage to follow the DMG table and make it more universally worthwhile, but thats still not exactly a grand option compared to attacking for an effect.

So I'd say 5e is closest to 2e here. You're taking a risk and hoping it's better than a standard attack, but relying on the situation and GM to decide if throwing fire is better than swinging swords.

>>50619489
Waiting for an answer.

>>50619540
If the dm spices things up it is in spite of five eee, not because of it. Stop using this as excuse, because a dm could do even better spicing with a good system, rather than a system that works against improvisation and creativity.

>>50619566
I used to absolutely *hate* monk, but now I'd just rather not play them. I think I've realized that it's not that the monk class and it's archetypes are restrictive as far as creativity goes, but it requires more overall refluffing or reflavoring or using different verbage to move outside of the stereotypical "asian" theme it has (IE: Ki, step of the wind, stunning fist, etc). Whereas all the other classes have more "generic" terms (or at least Westernized terms, because D&D overall is 'western' or 'European' fantasy).

>>50619557
It's okay anon. I know you can puzzle out what that was a typo of using context clues. You can do it if you try!

>>50619601
Yet here you are, playing a d20 system. You objectively have no taste.

>>50619613
>this trpg is bad if you don't use imagination and creativity
Yeah, no shit.

>>50619613
>If a DM does what the system encourages them to do then it's in spite of the system
Anon just leave

>>50619607
Thanks anon. It appears conclusively that Improvanon is a shit and should get good.

>>50619636
Nice strawman.

>This trpg is bad because it discourages and works against creativity.

File: Shroud_by_SickJoe.jpg (107KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 1024x768px

>>50619566
i think the monk is really well done. elements was kind of a flop, and makes me wonder if they really thought about making it actually enjoyable, but the rest of it is really good. gets weird abilities to do stuff out of combat as well as in combat, feels different than other classes. the other archetypes are really good and generally well received. just elements was a fuck up.

>>50619597
they're really good. improved smite helps a lot too. but paladins are really good at anything, really.

>>50619638
>The dm is doing what the system encourages him to do by ignoring the system

Yah no

>>50619597
It's easily inferior to PAM, but raising dex instead of strength is good and you don't have to go variant human for the feat so you can get something like heavy armour master for +1 strength and better heavy armour (if you have 14 strength) or go half-elf or all sorts of things.

Good if you don't want to get a shield but you want to focus charisma.

I wouldn't recommend upping dexterity though, and it makes you extremely MAD if you want both heavy armour and two-weapon-fighting unless you're a dwarf, which doesn't have the best stats for it.

You could dump strength and go for medium armour, but that's a total of -3 AC over a heavy armour, shield-wearing paladin. Still, might be nice. Or you could even forsake your speed or if you're a wood elf dump strength again and suffer the -10 to speed. A wood elf wearing heavy armour it doesn't have the strength for is as fast as a dwarf in heavy armour.

>>50619613
5e does say fluff is an excellent addition and should be used a lot.

>>50619662
Have you thought about going to a thread for a game you like and leaving these people to a thread for a game they like?

>>50619671
Every RPG says that anon, stop being RPG illiterate.

The true test is not the introductory paragraph that every RPG has espousing the wonders of creativity, but how well the rules actually encourage creativity.