/5eg/ D&D Fifth Edition General

File: ok-hand-sign.png (33KB, 256x256px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 256x256px

5e

>>50783523
>Do you include matchlock guns in your setting?
no but i have oft considered it

What's a good site or program I can use to make a custom monster sheet?

>>50783523
>Do you include matchlock guns in your setting?

no, they're just crossbows that force your setting into a specific technological period.

>>50783546
http://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/

>>50783546
homebrewery.naturalcrit.com is the easiest one, I think there is one specific for monsters too but I don't remember its name.

>>50783523
>Do you include matchlock guns in your setting?

Yeah, but they're a bit out-dated; my world has flintlocks coming into standard use.

>>50783565
The technological period of d&d is renaissance without weapons.

>>50783541
same here but i use them as they can be used to signify wealth, like a ornate black powder pistol etc, but im still torn

>>50783586
I mean guns

File: rsz_mountain_3427.jpg (141KB, 300x427px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 300x427px

Making a rough-and-tumble Explorer cleric.

Thoughts?

Variant Human, Magic Initiate- Wizard (Prestidigitation, Mold Earth, Find Familiar)

Cleric 1, (Life)
UA Ranger 3, Underdark

From there I'm undecided on if I should go all Cleric, or potentially pumping Ranger to 5 for Extra Attack and a Level 2 Ranger spell.

Also what weapon should I use? Heavy Crossbow seems the obvious choice for an explorer as a stand-in Musket.

>>50783586
Or earlier, or later. Greyhawk canonically has Zeppelins in it, those are a middle-industrial-age invention.

>>50783602
>Also what weapon should I use?
war. pick.

File: a mistake has been made.jpg (640KB, 1280x2009px) Image search: [Google]

640KB, 1280x2009px

>>50783586
I think you mean gunpowder weapons. But thats just the default setting. People running home games are free to do whatever they want with the tech level.

>>50783586
I don't understand what you're trying to say.

>>50783629
keep reading

File: FlamboyantUnderstatedGelada-size_restricted.gif (296KB, 500x400px) Image search: [Google]

296KB, 500x400px

>>50783615
...I'm guessing the ghost of some Reb cavalryman has learned that his descendant is black?

https://5egmegaanon.github.io/5etools/classes.html

Early version of classes. It needs work on sorting and accessibility (especially for subclasses) but all the info is displayed, at least. I'll work on it more tomorrow.

File: 1481684155091.png (652KB, 676x676px) Image search: [Google]

652KB, 676x676px

>>50783611
>War Pick

>>50783523
>Do you include matchlock guns in your setting?

I got one in the AL. But it sucks

File: thats the joke.jpg (22KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 480x360px

>>50783643
>Ghost refers to his family as "the Stuart name"
>Only guy in tank crew with name "stuart" is black
Congrats, you figured it out!

I'm planning a character that will dip into every class at some point. What are worthwhile classes that deserve a double/triple dip?

>>50783694
I mean, is that the entire comic, or...? Google is coming up with something called "Haunted Tank", but not a lot on it.

>>50783633
If you play a published adventure yes, but it doesn't have to. You can refluff the phb weapons to be from almost any era where people used swords, and people have used swords much longer than they've used guns. If you add guns and want to add increasing levels of technology as time goes on then relatively speaking you have a very short time before it becomes modern.

>>50783723
Yes that is one page of a full comic, but you only summed up the joke on that one page.
Pretty much the entire thing is racism jokes.

>>50783739
>then relatively speaking you have a very short time before it becomes modern.

You've probably got at least a good 400-500 years to work with, or longer, and that's assuming that technology advances at the same pace it did on Earth (there is no guarantee of that in the slightest). How many campaigns take place over that kind of time period?

>>50783739
i'm not that anon, but on earth guns were in wide use way before the advent of plate armor. hell, they existed in europe before that even, i'm not just talking about china.

>>50783739

The DMG has rules for Renn. era firearms that are actually setting appropriate for a world where the technology is actually well into when Guns were available and pretty reliable.

>>50783523
>Do you include matchlock guns in your setting?

Yes, but often they are rare because they are sold in a far off kingdom almost impossible to travel to. This way I can get away with only the nobles having guns and put enemies with them here and there.

>>50783757
As an expansion to this, the earliest mention of firearms in Russia dates to 1382, where Muscovites used firearms to defend against the Golden Horde. Around the 13th century (1200s), Italy was already making use of hand-canons; and the earliest surviving firearm from Europe dates to 1396 (it was found in Estonia).

Plate armor reached its peak in the 15th and 16th centuries, though complete suits of plate armor as we'd recognize them were in use starting around the early 1400s, which in either case makes it a contemporary of European firearms.

Hello guys I'm kinda of a new DnD player and been playing a campaign with friends for a little more than half a year now. I'm a ranger who focuses on damage where ever I can and I'm starting to realize that Bows don't do nearly as much damage as the magic casters can do. Our sorcerer is mostly utility and can easily out damage me with his spells which is a good thing because we need it. Though I'm wondering if there are any way other people have attempted to up the dps on their bow focused character without the use of crazy enchantments or just buying a better +1-3 bow?

>>50783757
>400-500 years; How many campaigns take place over that kind of time period?

My setting is currently 300 years older than the first time someone played in it. I think using the same setting for multiple campaigns and multiple groups of players is neat. I feel like gun powder is sort of a point of no return because eventually someone will want to play a gun smith or want grenades and the development of those types of characters usually involves making better guns or bigger explosions. NPCs will notice the new technology and be willing to pay for it, which means the world as a whole advances technologically. A exceptionally rare and powerful magical sword might shape a region, but guns change the world. It might sound silly to make that comparison in a world where magic is real and gods have quantifiable influence but it would break my immersion if guns were not the best weapon at a certain point.

>>50783883
Sharpshooter is about it, for comparing with casters you need to keep in mind they are using a resource while you can shoot arrows all day every day.

>>50783883

Got Sharpshooter? Use Sharpshooter and do more damage all the time than a Sorceror can do with his X couple times a day spells the best of which will have a hard keeping up with your +20 damage twice a round shots

>>50783840

Yeah they original designers didnt realize that a lot of the stuff they put in the game was from a much later time period and would have existed in the Pike and Shot era

File: Chronomental 1.png (155KB, 689x511px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 689x511px

What do y'all think of this? My first take on adapting the Chronomental from the Tome of Beasts. It's probably higher CR than 9, I haven't done all the math yet, but I wanted to get some opinions on it.

>>50783910
>>50783926
Yeah I have sharpshooter the only thing is I usually have shit rolls so I don't activate it because it'd cause me to miss.

That is a fair point that I can just spam arrows. But my arrows usually do between 10-18 damage , I can obviously do more if I get a crit or get higher rolls that's just the average, that's usually including colossus damage. but when our caster use a spell and does in the 50+ I feel kinda useless.

Want to try playing with some friends. None of us have ever played D&D. Should we play on some online platform (though still in person)? How do we do this?

>>50783909
> I think using the same setting for multiple campaigns and multiple groups of players is neat.

I do too, but I also recognize that the world is a big place and I don't have to necessarily advance the timeline just to make sure that the previous campaign never intersects with the subsequent one.

I mean, Europe doesn't *look* that big, but according to D&D rules going from Madrid to Moscow (2,138 miles) would take about 89 days on foot (and that's assuming you've got flat, open land the entire way...which you don't).

What resources do you guys use as a DM? It's my first time and I've got everything I need written out on paper but want to know if there's something easier to use.

>>50783978

That's the idea of casters (particularly wizards). If you want to feel more useful, go Battlemaster 3 so you maneuver die to manipulate the battlefield. But casters wind down and get weaker the longer the day goes on - they might get big impressive shows of damage, but you'll do more damage more consistently on a per-round basis.

>>50783994

Get the starter set, nominate a DM, play through Lost Mines of Phandelver. If you can meet in person don't bother with online shit.

>>50784008
Yeah but how do we represent areas etc.

>>50784006
my dm uses onenote

>>50783605
>those are a middle-industrial-age invention
More like late industrial age. The first rigid air ship (and Zeppelin) was made in 1899, the first car as we know it was made around 1885 (fully mechanized vehicle with an internal combustion engine). So yeah cars are older than Zeppelins, airplanes are only slightly younger.

>>50784020
>>50784006
Seconding OneNote here. It's a fantastic tool for DMs.

>>50783762
>>50783840

Gothic plate armor yes, but people have made armor from plates of metal since ancient Greece.

>>50784019

You can buy a big ol dry erase map at most local game stores (or order it online). Get some dry erase markers, and the DM can draw on it as they please. Or just do theater of the mind (no map, nothing but paper and dice).

>>50783615
That face at the bottom is a perfect reaction image.

>>50784019
Some like having a map and figurines to represent each character, but 5e is simple enough that you can easily just rely on descriptions.

>>50784020
Thirding, that shit is insane.

>>50784037
>>50784041
I think a map is a must, but I feel like doing that bit digitally would be way quicker and easier.

>>50784035
which aren't what is represented by plate mail in the phb.
if you want another example, rapiers were invented way after guns.
i'm not telling you how to play the game, hell, i don't include guns in my game. but i'm just saying the phb inventory isn't indicative of any particularly accurate time period in human history.

Anyone tried the Arcane Archer? I really want to play one as my next character

>>50784008
so I'd have to duel class into fighter to get that right?

>>50783978

Sharpshooter tacks on +10 damage you also get +3-5 from your Dex 1D8 from the attack and 1D8 from CS. Thats an average of about 22 damage a hit all for an occasional miss that could be easily compensated for by a magic weapon which will also up your damage to 23-25. this means on a single round you should be able to put out 46 damage from range for no resource cost but arrows. With a Magic bow making attacks more reliable and maybe Hunters Mark you should be bumping 50 a round Sure you might miss now and then but generally attack outpaces AC and the +!0 damage vastly surpasses the occasional miss

>>50784077
I see. So the route to go would be buffing myself and damage per attack and not worry about the accuracy.
Note that we're all around level 11 and I have very little enchanted gear.

>>50784024
I've never really used OneNote before, what's great about it? Any tips to get started with it?

>>50783999
Some of my players want to play the child of their previous characters who got a happy ending so it's not always arbitrary.

>>50784021
The industrial age lasts until around the advent of personal computers, which is either 1975 or 1980 (depending on how much credit you want to give to IBM). The industrial age started, meanwhile, around 1820 or so.

So pegging the beginning at 1820 and the end at 1975 makes the industrial age last about 155 years. Zeppelins launching in 1899 would be 76 years into the industrial age, which is in fact almost exactly halfway through the industrial age.

(Properly speaking there's actually an argument to be made that the industrial age is still going on, though I'm not in that camp)

>>50784051

It certainly could be, but the map adds a fun layer of tactile feedback for everyone involved. You lose a lot of the charm of the game if you're all hovering over and looking at your laptops instead of each other.

>>50784067

Yes

i'm making a few homebrew classes

except they don't have archetypes, they're basically one build each

do i still call them classes?

>>50784149
It's free, allows for a lot of organization, you can embed all types of media directly, draw over everything, organize notes on a page how you want. It's got cloud-sync so you can use it on multiple systems and even access it on a phone.

I've used Wikis and Evernote and OneNote is far ahead of both in terms of usability and feature set.

>>50783976
No opinions?

>>50784167
*Oops, 79 years. Terrible math fail, mea culpa. It's still very close to the actual halfway point, however.

I know all this because of my senior class paper for high school. My thesis was on the modern-day commercial applications of Zeppelins, dirigibles, and other rigid airships, which necessarily involved going into the history of Zeppelins.

I absolutely should not have done as well on that paper as I did, particularly since it was a paper we were supposed to be working on for the entire year but which in fact I only did the day before it was due. Got an A minus.

My working theory is that everyone else was doing papers on depressing stuff like wars and death and disease and we're running out of oil and blah blah blah, and then suddenly the teacher turns to my paper which basically had the premise of "ZEPPELINS ARE AWESOME", and it was such a pick-me-up that she graded it more favorably than she might have in isolation.

But, hey, an A- is an A-, no matter how it's earned.

>>50784139

Pretty much. There isnt a whole lot you have to do other than use Sharpshooter. I assume you have Archery as your fighting style and a magic weapon to compensate for the hit penalty. Hunters Mark can work and can last pretty much all day as a 3rd level spell

>>50784189

Yes? What else are you going to call them?

>>50784270
>>50784189

Boring.

>>50783568
CritterDB, I think

>>50784269
Just got hunters mark on my last level up haven't had a chance to use it yet. So the big thing is getting a really good enchanted bow?

>>50784056
The rapier may have been invented after guns, but stabbing swords have been used in warfare for thousands of years.
D&D is not a good system for historical accuracy. The weapon table is a good example of that, but all the entries on the weapon and armor tables would be available in some form from antiquity. Guns are not like that. I couldn't run a bronze age campaign with guns in it because it would break my immersion.

>>50784337
There is nothing remotely resembling plate armor in antiquity.

A bronze longsword would be too heavy to use and would shatter or bend irreparably after just a few swings anyway.

Fucking bronze age crossbows? What?!

>>50784299
>Just got hunters mark on my last level up
You get that at level 2 though. Did you go 2-10 without it?

>>50783999
I know the US pioneers averaged around 12 miles per day which doubles that 89 days. 2138 miles in 89 days would require right around 24 miles a day, or 8 hours of walking 3mph which isn't particularly unreasonable either.

>>50784365
yea I got it as a level 2 spell but just switched it out on my level 11 level up

>>50784337
idk why you want to be right about this so bad. i give a fuck what you do. point is guns would exist alongside plenty of things in the players handbook as they are listed.
so yes, i agree with you that d&d is not good for historical accuracy.
just because there are stabbing weapons irl in lots of time periods doesn't make those all rapiers, and doesn't mean that because rapiers are in the phb that you need to jerk yourself off about bronze age campaigns or whatever your stupid point is

>>50784299

The accuracy will matter much more than the 2 extra damage a magic will net you. Turn a close miss into a hit is the biggest appeal. Its the same for Dex as more accuracy that stacks on top of your damage is great.

+4 Prof. Bons+5 Dex+2 Archery style+2 Bow -5 SS=+8 to hit and average roll of 18

+10 SS+5 Dex+2 Bow+3 Hunters Mark+4 CS +4 weapon damageX2=56 damage a round

File: screenshot-boards.4chan.org 2016-12-20 09-35-19.png (416KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

416KB, 500x500px

>>50784040

>>50784400
My dex is 16 currently, had some bad starting roles been working with a strength of 5 through out the campaign, so I only have a +3 in the dex and a +1 bow, I'm assuming that the other + after archery style is from a +2 bow.

I also have usually bad roles and sometimes find it hard to break at least for a ten for a base role, which is my own lucks fault. so against higher AC enemies i'll most likely miss if I use SS. Again with optimal rolls or hell average consistent rolls you are correct and I'd be doing that much damage so I see where I have false complaints.

File: Bronze_longsword_detail.png (1KB, 100x156px) Image search: [Google]

1KB, 100x156px

>>50784356
Google the wikipedia entries for "Anient history" "Plate armor" "Bronze Age sword" and "Crossbow"

>>50784159
I'm going to assume you are the anon that is wondering about the introduction of guns into his setting.

Note that for a long time in 5e's current setting (Faerun), from the very first published adventures in that realm (around 1986-1987 according to my Google-fu) to the present approx. 140 years have passed (Time of Troubles is in 1358 DR, latest official date given is 1491 DR, and Storm King's Thunder takes place "a few years" after the Rise of Tiamat adventure modules). Since then, their vague knowledge of black powder has evolved into some people (notably agents of the Zhentarim) having some form of firearm (see the Acq. Inc. videos, one of them gets shot with a gun).

Also, note that one island that was full of tinkering gnomes in the FR setting straight up disappeared for 100-ish years (basically all of 4th edition) and when they suddenly re-appear start buying up black powder and don't tell ANYONE why.

If it were me, I'd make it so that if guns were to be allowed, they would be VERY hard to come by, and you'd basically have to make yourself an expert with making ammo and black powder yourself to keep yourself stocked, much less repair the thing if it broke, which is partially what happened back in the older days too; any firearms expert basically had to make their own ammo and repair the thing if the barrel didn't explode on them.

>>50784453
Magical weapons are up to the gm, some don't give out any with numerical bonuses at all and monsters aren't balanced around it. While it's not his fault your main stat is -2 compared to what it should be, but a +3 weapon would make up for that.

>>50784453
What the hell campaign are you playing in where the DM lets you play with 5 Strength? Did you get talked into 3d6 with no re-rolls on 1 and he kept you to it?

File: bronze buggers.png (3MB, 1120x1688px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1120x1688px

>>50784356
>There is nothing remotely resembling plate armor in antiquity.
Well....

anyone have experience with the witch hunter class from critical role? how does it play, and is there any base classes that can achieve the same thing?

>>50784496
He let me re roll the 1's I just had Like 2's and 3's with it. Again My own shit rolls. Survived this far though With him throwing a lot of strength saves and shit like that my way. So my luck evens out a bit I guess.

>>50784492
Yea just need gold which we're severely lacking right now because one of our party members successfully stole and used 4/5 parties gold from our last payment. Not many people like his character right now because of it.

>>50784516
Blood hunter? It's like a mix of ranger and paladin in some ways, I haven't had the chance to try it but it seems well put together and balanced.

>>50784524
Tell the player outside of the game that that is unacceptable, unless you live in some anomaly where that is ok. Having reactions in-character is important but more-so you need to make the player understand that "it's what my character would do" does not justify being an asshole.

>>50784484
I was actually arguing against guns in my world. I also don't run published adventures, but I appreciate your research and suggestions.

>>50784516
I don't know about the critical role class, but can you describe what you're looking for?

>does it use magic?
>sword and crossbow?
>pointy hat?
>Agile, cunning, a hunter (or all 3)?

>>50784537
Even if there's a good reason for doing it roleplay-wise, it's damn near an unspoken rule to never steal from the party. Skim a little off the top maybe, but don't take literally 80% of the group's reward because they can, or "it's what my character would do."

>>50784537
Oh we know. He won't do it again because we'll all fuck him over if he does. He was playing his character and his character is an ass.

>>50784472
Plate armor is not the same thing as full plate mail as D&D describes it. Bronze age plate armor is represented in D&D by the breastplate more than anything else.

Bronze age swords had blades that were usually between 30 and 80 centimeters in length; a longsword's blade is between 80 and 110 centimeters.

I'll grant you that China and Greece had crossbows starting around the 6th century BC, but that would a) be after the end of the bronze age (1200 BC in the Near East; between 700 and 600 BC in Europe and China), and b) ancient crossbows were tremendously more expensive to produce than their Medieval-based PHB counterparts.

>>50784510
That's a mea culpa; I meant to say that there's nothing remotely resembling full plate, or even real half-plate, in antiquity. What you've posted wuld in D&D be represented by splint mail or breastplates.

>>50784552
If memory serves, the class is meant to be a melee DPS that sacrifices a bit of HP to augment their damage with elemental dice added into their main role. The closest analogy I can think of would be to refluff a Paladin's smiting with elemental damage on every hit for a minute, and they're limited to medium armor.

File: heavy hoplite.jpg (4MB, 3543x5315px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3543x5315px

>>50784572
What about the heavy hoplite? he even got armoured shoes.

>>50784516
I had a player play it and somehow buff himself past 20 strength. I never actually looked into it more than that though

File: theatreofmind.png (55KB, 235x293px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 235x293px

THEATER OF THE MIND

vs

BATTLEMATS

>>50784633
i prefer battlemats to be honest. makes everything seem more fair.

>>50784608
The only place I can find an image of armor like the one you posted is from a YouTube video called Hoplite Hellas, which appears to have been made by some Hellaboo.

I'm not aware of such armor ever having actually been used by historical hoplites.

Anyone know of any good oneshot adventures?

> Paladin UA
> Both oaths are retard evil

Why must you do this, Wizards?

>>50783523
Is a 20 pt buy too low in 5e or are my players pussies?

>>50784650
>michael jackson eating popcorn dot gif

>>50784633

battlemats

>>50784650
Given that the standard is 27, it's pretty low.

It's enough to get (12, 12, 11, 11, 11, 11). Or (14, 13, 10, 10, 10, 10). Or (15, 15, 10, 8, 8, 8).

So, yeah, if I was a player, I'd ask what I did to make you hate me.

File: hueeh.png (2MB, 1440x1200px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1440x1200px

>>50784644
I have images with illustrations of it, but it is on my external drive. That being said, that is no source and I am not versed enough in bronze age arms and armour to say anything for sure.

File: 1281044577000.jpg (86KB, 500x800px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 500x800px

>>50784648

IS THIS NOT WHAT THE PLAYERS WANTED? ARE THEY NOT ENTERTAINED WITH EDGY ARCHETYPES?

>>50784559
I'm surprised you actually did it.

My usage of antiquity was loose and not entirely accurate since I meant the period right at the end.

My argument was that armor made of metal plates is close enough to full plate mail that I wouldn't mind it mechanically existing in an older campaign setting where as guns would not have existed at all during that time.

"From an early time the swords reach lengths in excess of 100 cm. The technology to produce blades of such lengths appears to have been developed in the Aegean, using alloys of copper and tin or arsenic, around 1700 BC."
This is a quote from the first paragraph on the bronze age sword Wikipedia article.

In a world where you can magically enchant weapons to increase their value I don't think extra production cost is as big of a deal as it would have been in real life.

>>50784672
>>50784643
>preferring 'balance' to USING THE POWER OF YOUR IMAGINATION to have GREAT ADVENTURES
you're literally playing wrong

>>50784694
Also just to add more examples, pretty sure halberds came after guns too.

I'm also wondering this, Is it logical to have a "good necromancer"? As in they use their powers over the dead to help people instead of being evil. Because for my next campaign I was thinking of do that but the DM is urging against the reasoning of it.

File: Consolidated Character Options List.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>50784648
Because all the options in the PHB and other official/semi-official releases are pretty much Good or at least neutral. Paladin genuinely needed some good evil options that weren't Oathbreaker.

Speaking of, though, here's an updated consolidated character options.

>>50784678
Is having a 27 pt buy with three 15s at the beginning similar in power to having three 18's in 3.5 at the start?

are castles and keeps the same thing basically? or is one implied to be more fortified than the other?

File: 1289954318129.png (737KB, 654x564px) Image search: [Google]

737KB, 654x564px

>>50784704
>implying

get thee gone, gobbo, before i end your short, pitiful life.

>>50784715

/tg/'s had a lot of fun bouts with that, mostly in creating post-scarcity medieval societies out of it.

>>50784715
You fulfill losts soul's requests. Say Casper wants to see his family again, you do that. Sooo it just so happens an orc is in the way, and you use Casper on your merry journey.

Not forcing the souls to fight for you and helping them instead seems legit.

>>50784694
>This is a quote from the first paragraph on the bronze age sword Wikipedia article.

Yes, but keep reading for additional context. Swords of 100 cm were rare; most ranged between 60 and 80 cm (I earlier said 30; it's 4:26 AM where I am). Most of the swords of 100 cm in length come from Crete, but they got shorter over time, as did swords of that length elsewhere; this was due to the fact that the issues of bronze swords of that length (weight, both of continuously wielding it in battle and the thing being relatively delicate compared to an iron or steel sword) became apparent, so they were shrunk.

>magical weapons

But anon, the same exact logic could apply to gunpower. In the Forgotten Realms, in fact, it actually does: smokepowder is a magical substance there.

>>50784704
No u

>>50784715
Sure, but just remember to not raise undead. That is, in 5e D&D, an explicitly and unquestionably evil act.

>>50784650
Limiting the points but not the max means you're going to have 15 15 10 8 8 8 instead of 15 15 14 12 10 10 or something. Make the max 14 and give them 24 points or something and that might work. Similarly for higher power or to get it closer to rolling 4d6d1 31 points and 16 max is ok I think.

>>50784737
I see. So instead of raising skelis to help people out I'd be helping out spirit's so they'd move on.
>>50784734
So it's been discussed before then.
>>50784743
Damn I wanted an undead army of good.

File: 1463177219954.png (385KB, 671x461px) Image search: [Google]

385KB, 671x461px

How do you roll for stats? Are you super anal about it?

>>50784722
I don't know, maybe?

>>50784725
A keep is a glorified tower; a castle includes a keep, but also a number of other features.

Basically asking if a keep and a castle are the same thing is like asking if teeth and mouths are the same thing.

>>50784762
4d6 drop lowest, six times; you can reroll your lowest result, but if you do you also have to reroll your highest result.

>>50784762
i don't, but if i did i think i would just make any stat under 8 get set to 8.

>>50784716
>Paladin genuinely needed some good evil options that weren't Oathbreaker.
The problem is that (1) the existing options can be refluffed by changing the tenets and (2) 95% of campaigns are not evil ones, maybe edgy options work but evil ones do not. If you're playing an evil game you're refluffing and changing a lot of stuff anyway. Monstrous adventurers are also not mainly to give options for evil campaigns, but to to give options to play those races without it having to be an evil campaign.

>>50784762

point buy

everything else in character creation is a calculated decision so i don't see why that shouldn't be

unless you're some kind of grognard

>>50784771
So you get a free 18 every time? Or can you only reroll once?

>>50784776
>the existing options can be refluffed by changing the tenets
You can do that with the new UA options too, Oath of Conquest can pretty well represent a more extreme take on the Oath of the Crown, much more extremely dedicated to Law over Chaos as opposed to Good over Evil.

And Oath of Treachery could be played as more of a paladin counterpart to a Trickery Cleric, or even a more fey trickster approach to Oath of Ancients.

Rolled 1, 2, 6, 6, 3, 3, 6, 3, 2, 4, 6, 1, 4, 1, 1, 2, 4, 2, 5, 6, 4, 3, 2, 2 = 79 (24d6)

>>50784791
You can choose to reroll both your lowest result AND your highest result, after you've generated your six scores the normal way (4d6 drop lowest, six times).

So, no, you don't get a free 18. Hang on, let's give it a whirl.

>>50784790
>everything else in character creation is a calculated decision

>He doesn't randomly determine race, class, kit, or background details

>in particular the background details, they're right there on a table

>>50784764
>A keep is a glorified tower
thanks

Rolled 1, 6, 5, 2, 3, 6, 2, 4 = 29 (8d6)

>>50784791
1, 2, 6, 6 = 14
3, 3, 6, 3 = 12
2, 4, 6, 1 = 12
4, 1, 1, 2 = 7
4, 2, 5, 6 = 15
4, 3, 2, 2 = 9

'kay, so normally I would be broadly satisfied with this, but for the sake of argument I'm now going to reroll my 7 (lowest result) and my 15 (highest result)

>>50784837
so thats 7+4+4+5+5+1=26 points, not bad anon

>>50784837
1, 6, 5, 2 = 13
3, 6, 2, 4 = 13

So my starting scores are 14, 13, 13, 12, 12, 9. Not the worst, particularly after race is applied to turn that 14 into a 16 and one of those 13s into a 14.

File: firefly-jayne.jpg (97KB, 1080x600px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 1080x600px

>>50784776
>maybe edgy options work but evil ones do not.

If you do it wrong.

"Hell, I'll kill a man in a fair fight. Or if I think he's gonna start a fair fight. Or if he looks at me funny. Or if there's a girl involved. Or if I'm gettin' paid...mostly, if I'm gettin' paid."

File: FF6_Kefkaart.jpg (153KB, 769x1000px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 769x1000px

>Oath of Treachery

>>50784808
Exactly. But, by default, they give the paladin some Evil options that don't require him to have broken any oaths first. So they fill in a missing fluff niche.

Incidentally, if all we're complaining about is the fluff aspects of the kits, I'm going to assume that mechanically, they're fine?

>>50784818
>>50784851
Yes, but if you can then reroll the highest and lowest again, you can do so until you have an 18. iI assume that is not the case.

>>50784875
Treachery is OP and Conquest is a bit bland but good I think.

>>50784871
>Intelligent, nihilistic, and with a wicked sense of humor

Personally I'm not a fan of it since it implies a, well, treacherous kind of evil who weasels his way out of harm. I prefer the "murder the shit out of things" kind of evil of Oathbreaker, if only because I find playing an Oathbreaker as a not-Vengeance paladin in a non-evil party a lot easier than I'd find a Treachery kike-paladin.

You could also make a Treachery paladin a Trickster paladin just as easily.

File: improvised weaponry.jpg (108KB, 620x682px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 620x682px

>>50784762
I've never actually made a character or played a game, but rolling for stats being the first thing always seemed weird to me.
I feel like deciding name, race, class, etc. should be first for some reason.

i thought i was being a cool dm by letting my players roll for stats

take my advice, point buy is your friend

>>50784716
I respectfully disagree, evil Paladins are a tiny minority, and most people who play Paladins want to play the heroic knight. Oathbreaker works as the evil Paladin. You could fluff Oathbreaker as both of the UA oaths.

File: beerus straw.gif (378KB, 512x283px) Image search: [Google]

378KB, 512x283px

>play Oath of Treachery
>self-centered smug jerk, bit of a coward
>grow close to the party
>start caring about and putting faith in them
>lose your Oath of Treachery powers and fall

>>50783541

I'm thinking of doing so, along with wheelock. Just wondering how to make them function.

Thought maybe rather than a to-hit I might make it a dex save for the shot-at party.

>>50784914
Wouldn't it be "rise" then?

>>50784862
That's for rogues/fighters. That kind of evil isn't dedicated enough for a Paladin.

>>50784914
Doesn't it specify that you can gain one of the normal oaths if you go against one of the new ones similarly to Oathbreaker?

>>50784890
Kinda disappointed in how they've reused abilities from other classes here, like how Conquest's Guided Strike is lifted straight from the Cleric's War Domain, and how the Blackguard's Escape is exactly the same as the Fey Pact's level 6 feature.

I enjoy Conquest's spell list and the flavor of their level 7 Aura, but I agree that Treachery seems slightly over tuned, especially for a GWM build given how easy it is for them to gain advantage.

>>50784760
>>50784743
>explicitly and unquestionably evil act.
[citation needed], the spell says nothing of the sort. Some deities are against it (Kelemvorino comes to mind), but it's not like the act of raising them does anybody any harm.

Sure, it's creepy as fuck, but it's kind of like having a robot made of bone and flesh. You could raise them from those who are willing, or your dead enemies (raising someone's granny without their consent tends to be a major faux pas). One thing you should keep in mind, though, is that you should destroy them before you lose your control of them.

I read that the valor bard is a very good spellcaster, more that the wizard. Can you explain this to me? Thanks!

>>50785017
I haven't looked into it that much didn't even know I could lose control over them.

File: 1356905210263.jpg (218KB, 479x640px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 479x640px

Has anyone ever got bored of being DM and just said fuck it and killed everyone?

>tfw forever DM

>>50785091
The spell lasts for 24h, after that you can't control them any longer unless you recast the spell on them.

>>50785107
I didn't know that thank you for letting me know. Is there any spell that would give me some type of permanent control over the minions I would summon?

>>50785142
No, WOTC decided that permanent spells weren't kosher.
A single cast of the spell reasserts control over up to four undead, though, so you can easily always have four skellies with you with a single 3rd level spell slot (cast, arcane recovery, cast, long rest, reassert control, arcane recovery, cast, long rest; repeat until 4 skellies)

>>50785103
No, because playing with one of my players as the DM is an even worse experience

>>50785183
Oh so I'd have less of an army of good but rather a squad of skelis

Would it be too much bullshit to give this ability to a monster?

>Rewind (3/Day). When a creature within 30 feet of it succeeds on an attack roll, ability check or saving throw, it can use its reaction to force the creature to reroll and take the new result.

File: ss+(2016-09-29+at+09.25.37).jpg (18KB, 289x93px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 289x93px

>>50785017

>>50785088
Lore Bard famalam, It's because they get a nice suite of spells then Magical secrets let's them take spells from any other class, they're kind of hidden very strong.

>>50785241
Aha, I see. Oh well, that solves that.

To be honest I think that piece of fluff is shit and explains very little ("animate dead is bad because it is"). What's the difference between that and moving the corpse through Telekinesis?

>>50785305
Moving a corpse via telekinesis is like a morbid puppet You're actively moving it.

Moving a corpse via Animate Dead is literally suffusing it with negative energy to the point it moves on it's own.

In theory you could Animate Dead with other power sources, but I don't see many Radiant powered skellies around.

>>50785327
But why not?
What is stopping you from making a skelly move through Positive Energy?

>>50785333
I'd assume since Necrotic=death energy it's easier to make undead with it.

It'd be like trying to use something like water as a fuel source. It's doable if you convert it into hydrogen using specialized equipment and a shitload of research, or you can just use gasoline much more easily, though it burns less cleanly.

>>50785327
I think the guys at WOTC are idiots.

>Animate Dead is totally evil guys
>Give all Clerics the spell for no reason at all

>Using negative energy to kill people is totes ok
>Nothing is said about Magic Jar

>>50785352
Right, Necrotic = Death energy
So Radiant = Life energy
Movement and Animation is closer to Life than Death
So???

>>50785375
nigga I dunno go ask one of those chucklefucks on Twitter.

Also life≠Undead

>>50785360
Just looked up magic jar, and holy shit that's some fucked up shit right there. Fuck skeli's as evil.

>>50785333
I think that's the difference between Animate Dead and Raise Dead. Both are necromancy, but Raise Dead suffuses the body with positive energy and draws the spirit back to its vessel, restoring life, while Animate Dead uses negative energy to create a mimicry of life. It's cheaper (3rd<5th), doesn't really bring them back to life but it's great if you want mindless servants.

>>50783586
>renaissance without weapons.

We kung-fu itallians nao?

>>50785436
this is the truth and the only truth

>>50785305
It doesn't get into technical specifics, it generally falls to the DM to describe the why and how of that manner of sin. Torturing the subjects soul in the process is a valid explanation. Although maybe someone better informed can explain how it works in faerun specifically.

>>50785399
Check out Contagion too, with non-evil effects such as:
>Blinding Sickness. Pain grips the creature’s mind, and its eyes turn milky white.
>Flesh Rot. The creature’s flesh decays.

or Blight
>Necromantic energy washes over a creature of your choice that you can see within range, draining moisture and vitality from it.

or Power Word Kill, which is somehow an Enchantment spell which kills somebody instantly.

But hey, don't let me catch you raising a skeleton to carry around your stuff.

>>50785360
>I think the guys at WOTC are idiots.
You're just now catching on?

>>50785375
D&D is close to kitchen sink, don't expect things to be logical when you get to the details. E.g. Angels are made of "astral essence" which is never mentioned anywhere else.

>>50785446
But it makes no sense whatsoever.

Option A: it inflicts some sort of harm on the soul of the victim
>Only use it on Evil creatures
>Destroy the undead as soon as you're done with them (which may be less than an hour?)
>There's a spell that literally imprisons you forever, and somehow it is not evil?
>Many spells inflict terrible pain/fear and they're 100% OK to use

Option B: it harnesses purely evil energies
>Then every Necromancer must be evil, because like 90% of their spells use negative energy
>Casting Chill Touch becomes an Evil act.

>>50785464
Jesus. I suppose if that's included with the necromancy kit raising skelis along with killing and torturing things in the most way possible would solidify the "evil" part. though you could also not use those abilities and go another damage route.

>>50785491
How about
>The powers of good collectively and arbitrarily decided they don't like the creation of undead regardless of the reasons and those that regularly do so are barred from their favored afterlives.
It's not like alignment has any other mechanics anyway.

>>50785496
Except the PHB literally says "not all necromancers are evil". I guess they expect you to cast Speak with Dead exclusively.

>>50785533
I suposse you could say so.

If it ever comes up in one of my games, I'm just gonna handwave it away if they want to play a Good necromancer, because it's just a fucking mess.

>>50785375
Nigga what do you think resurrection is?
It's harder to access, costs more, takes longer, but it makes a more environmentally friendly bag of meat.

>>50785568
Stop fucking samefagging.

Fuck off with your trip.

>>50785568
If they want the mechanics, let them use Animate Objects to replicate the effects of Animate Dead instead of learning the normal version.
If they want the flavor, they gotta deal with the flavorful consequences.

the lore in my game is that creating undead is distinctly evil because it binds hateful spirits residing on the other side of the weave to the corpse, giving them form into this world. The necromancer has control over them for a short time, but if they aren't disposed of, they become extremely dangerous.

In that regard, everyone treats necromancers as if they're evil, as even one with good intentions is too much of a risk. It's safer for the populace to assume they're evil.

Having it as a "forbidden magic" option makes it more interesting, I think. Otherwise every school of magic is same-y with some bullshit grey moral justification always being possible, willfully ignoring the impact of magic on the surrounding world. Similarly conjurers who summon extraplanar creatures are also feared, although more have advised powerful rulers than necromancers, who tend to be more self-absorbed and driven towards their own power.

I guess the reasoning behind Raising the dead is that in most cases, the old "owner" of the bones wasn't asked permission, and as such, the act is considered desacration.
I would houserule it that if you first speak with the dead and get the ok, its not an evil act.

>>50785631
organ doner undead only with "do not resuscitate" wristbands

>>50785600
>samefagging
>trip
Zero out of two. We'll give you another try.

>>50785611
Hm, that sounds good. Not getting a zombie buddy until level 9 kinda sucks though.

>>50785670
Remove your goddamn trip.
We know you fucked up and forgot to remove your trip when you samefagged.

>>50785623
>if they aren't disposed of
Is it possible to dispose of undead safely after animation?

By the way I really like your idea and the intention behind it.

>>50785259
Thank you for your answer!
I'm ok with that on mid-level, but isn't a wizard with arcane tradition:devotion even more OP?

>>50785568
Necromancy is a school about souls, life force and bodies.

Thus they could have the following:

Body tempering magic.

Cloning magic.

Creation of artificiall souls.

Creation of vessels for artificiall souls.

>>50785687
Fuck off.

>>50785687
>Is it possible to dispose of undead safely after animation?

Yep, you can destroy the corpse and they won't rise again without more magic. All it takes for them to not get destroyed is one good necromancer overextending themselves and not having enough magic left to do cleanup; more likely, one evil necromancer who commands the undead away so they don't have to waste their own reserve of magic dealing with it.

As a DM, it wouldn't bother me having a player who deals with these challenges and tries to be good. The consequences are all pretty clear from 5e's rules on Create Undead and Animate Dead - when the duration's up, they aren't under your control anymore. You can crank out a shitload of skeletons and lose control at the end of the day, easy. It's more fun like that, I think.

If you like the "hateful spirits" idea, I'd recommend Mark Lawrence's "Prince of Fools" series. It's not really about necromancy, but that's basically where I'm drawing the hateful spirits thing from. The audiobook is fantastically voiced as well.

How would we reconcile 4e into 5e to make the best edition?

>>50785756
Ignore the people trying to turn 5e into 3.5 or 4e, play the game like AD&D reincarnated in the modern day RPG environment it is.

Lord Nomic, your work is appreciated. You make good stuff.

>>50785772
>play the game like AD&D reincarnated in the modern day RPG environment it is.
Meaning what exactly?

What is the absolute max AC a player can get?

194th for include 5egmegaanon github in the OP

>>50785756
Last time I tried something along those lines, I brought back the [W] mechanic and added a similar [M] to go along with it. Scaling of powers worked a lot like a 5e fighters extra attack and cantrips, with some uses having more multipliers and bonuses.

Note that this not only drew from the two editions, and was a bunch of extra shit otherwise. Not sure how or if I'd apply it to a 4.5.

>>50785807
Why isn't it even in the OP?
Whoever is creating these threads is a complete cuntnugget.

>>50785789
You don't need 10,000 different character options, use and fluff whats available.
You don't need hard mechanics for arbitrary one off situations, abstract it out.
Theater of the mind is entirely sufficient the vast majority of the time, not so for 4e, and less so for 3.5.
Even min-maxed characters don't outperform the most underwhelming by the margin it did in 3.5.

>>50785822
Every time I'm about to make a new thread I ask "Is there any changes to the OP pasta?" and give it a few minutes. Usually some nigger makes a new thread anyway despite me having one ready to go so I didn't bother this time.

If I make the next thread I'll add it.

>>50783546
Personally i like this one.
http://thegeniusinc.com/dd-monster-maker-download/

>>50785802
I'll try : you get a 10 + 2 modifier AC class (barb or monk), +2 shield (the object), defensive fighting style +1.

So you're at 23 before +5 Shield (spell) and +2 haste. That's 30 during until your next turn.

Then there are magic items a shield can be +1/2/3 you could wield a defender sword, there are magical armors too in the dmg

>>50785823
>You don't need 10,000 different character options, use and fluff whats available.
But would you also admit 5e is also lacking in options and a limited addition of classes would be beneficial to the system.

>>50785831
People want the anonymous glory of creating a thread, which is fucking bizarre. But we had a complete tool of a tripper, fuck that cuntnugget.

Godspeed.

>>50785850
No?
I think that the vast majority of complaints about specific character concepts are doable right now, and while i welcome truly new character classes, i don't find them needed.
Mystic seemed cool, if its just Wizard - The Psi Point edition, it should have been an archetype.
The oft requested "warlord" is just a battlemaster with high charisma, rally, and inspiring leader are fantastic.
I won't say that new options would ruin the game, although too many certainly can, but that they are entirely unneeded.

>>50785846
So, potentially, level 20 barb with 24 con, 20 dex, instead of a fighting style, You would unarmoured and have 22 AC. A +3 shield, a defender and haste would make that 30 AC, and a magic initiate feat could give you Shield for a 1 per day 35. Is it possible to go any higher than 30 without shield?

>>50785876
We could use an Int-based class, though. If just to make the stat useful outside of Wizard spells.

Of course, I'd also like to see Strength somehow get buffed so Dex isn't just generally better.

>>50785885
You can theoretically cap out your stats over centuries via Manuals and Tomes, the Blade Master UA feat is a reaction based +1 ac for the non-shield turns, an animated shield lets you use 2 defender weapons, and lets you use another +1ac from duel wielder, which is 2+1+1+3+3, compared to shield+defender of 5+3.

>>50783602
>life
>not nature

retarded desu

>multi-classing UA Ranger

lol

>>50785900
I'll entirely agree than Int and Str could use some love, and dex could probably drop a bit. Things like making Mage Armor 10+int, or a flat number that doesn't use dex, would help cut down on the "every class needs dex" that exists.

I'll also agree that an additional int class, preferably not full caster, is probably the most potentially good class for the game.

>>50785944
I considered that but I don't see why a Cleric would change their deity of worship if it was thanks to their power that they survived their expedition in the first place.

>>50785876
>>50785900
Having a Con-caster would be so good.

>>50785993
A constitution wizard is already fucking good.
All casters want Con for concentration, a concentration class with con as its primary isn't a good idea for the game.
It also doesn't make a lick of sense.

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

1B, 486x500px

>>50785954
>>50785900
Here are some half-decent rules to make Int more worthwhile.

there is no hope for strength though, the best you can do is heavily limit encumbrance weighs

>>50785885
Just now looking at feats/other items
>Defensive duelist could give you a reaction +6 instead of shield, and is better than blade master
>Duel Wielder + animated shield/bracers of defence (can only use one) giving an extra ac like >>50785919 said.

However, due to attunement limits, we can't use ring/cloak of protection, That brings us to 33 + 6 once per turn

Modifying the EK and bladesinger into a 1/2 caster and a 1/2 fighter respectively would be a good start.

>>50786015
You obviously haven't looked at the scarred witch doctor for inspiration.

>>50786015
You could have blood mages or lardomancers.
Stop being a shit.

File: Chronomental.png (144KB, 714x560px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 714x560px

>>50785837
Thanks, but I already used natural crit to remake pic related. Would like some feedback on this!

I'm about to run Hoard of the Dragon Queen this Friday for a group of 5 friends.
I know this isn't considered to be a good write-up, but any tips or past experiences to share? I've read the guide to tyranny of dragons and it seems like most of the intro could be skipped.

>>50786070
>heading at the very bottom of the page

c'mon son!

Making a new character, want to pick something I've never played before.

Need background ideas.

>Bard-
an Archer maybe?
>Monk-
Ideally I'd like to make some kind of beefy brawler, but that doesn't seem practical for a Monk.
>Ranger
I'm completely blank on original ideas for a Ranger.
>Sorcerer
UA Shadow Sorcerer looks like it could be fun for an edgy character. (Also it looks even more cheesy than UA Ranger for Multiclass dip)

File: Chronomental.png (145KB, 711x594px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 711x594px

>>50786122
Fucking hell, I swear it wasn't like that before. There, I added a bullshit trait because I don't know how to make blank lines.

>>50786205
Google up blank characters, you'll find a few you can copy/paste for that use.

>Sorcerer made d8 hit die and given some spell slots (probably not all) on short rest/or you get back Sorcery Points on short rest
Better or overpowered?

>>50786229
Yeah, I'll probably do that later. But what about the monster? Does it seem fun?

>>50786248
Why? Does it fix any of the class' problems?
Just give Magical Secrets, or otherwise expand the spell list, and the sorcerer will be a-ok.
Your fixes would make life easier, in small ways, for Sorcerer/Paladins looking to spam smites, is that an archetype you want to cater to?

>>50786248

Then why play the already a bit meh warlock?

File: Nox.png (125KB, 362x600px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 362x600px

>>50786134
Warforged Shadow Sorcerer.

Once a powerful Wizard, you attained immortality by binding your soul to a mechanical form- however doing so destroyed your lair, all your notes, and your original body (As well as a decent chunk of the nearby countryside) in a magic nuclear explosion. Your new form is considerably weaker (Magically) than calculations suggested, and as such must learn to control your new body to become as powerful as you were previously.

>>50786329
You can also add a bit of the good ol' philosophical argument bullshit if you want. Are you really that Wizard, or just a Warforged with his memories?

Ignore the fact that this isn't an actual argument in a setting where a Soul is a real, provable thing

File: Class - Sorcerer - Origin Spells v0.2.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>50786248
I prefer this in addition to letting them use the spell point variant.

File: Class - Sorcerer - Transformations v0.1.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>50786349
Also this but it's WIP as fuck and questionable.

>>50786205
I like how it can separate the party, and alternate fighting the 2 halves, I'll have to use that mechanic in some sort of time shenanigans dungeon.

>>50786019
Tripfag was reading through the thread, and about makin zombies being evil it's because:

Animate Dead
>Your spell imbues the target with a foul mimicry of life, raising it as an undead creature.
>The creature is under your control for 24 hours, after which it stops obeying any command you've given it.

Raise Dead
>The spell can't return an undead creature to life.

So in-universe it is pretty nasty. Unless someone starts busting out expensive 7th level spells in 5th edition (not likely) those zombies you raised at 5th level can never be raised again. Not to mention the fake things that hunger for flesh you created, that unless you constantly bind them with magic will go round attacking everyone.

>>50784558
Give him the boot. Players who purposefully play as Chaotic characters deserve to suffer from nogames for all time.

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

2MB, 2550x938px

>>50786329
>>50786342
I actually like this

>Take Fighter at 1 for Heavy Armor and Defense style, fluff as body is naturally tough and well-suited to fighting
>Shadow Sorcerer the rest of the way


Too bad Sorcerer doesn't get Vampiric Touch, it'd be a great Broken Lord. I'd talk to a DM about replacing shadow doggo with something using it.

>>50784633
Theatre, no question

im new to dungeons and dragons, but I have a question regarding planar cosmology, is Ao from FR the same Ao from the other cosmologies and is only omnipotent in the crystal sphere of abier toril?

File: snip.png (23KB, 401x322px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 401x322px

Can I Booming Blade/GFB and Shield Master bash on the same turn or does that not count as an "attack action"?

Also 5eMegaAnon, the tools page is hella useful. Keep it up bro.

>>50786496
Those cantrips are spell actions that allow an attack roll. So, no.

>>50784914
Paladins rising to Devotion are my fetish

I keep hearing Sorlocks are unbalanced. Why? I'm looking over them and all it seems to do is let you use EB and get some spell slots on short rest.

>>50785900
>>50785954
For int and str I think that's a core flaw of the system, buffing them straight up as is makes wizard and barbarian, one arguably the best class and the other quite strong, just better.

I recommend allowing any caster to use a lesser stat as their modifier instead of the standard one, as in Wisdom>Charisma>Intelligence. I.e. every caster can use INT, opening up a lot of character concepts and (unless optimizing and not rolling stats) making int much more used. Strength has the best weapons and one of the best feats for those weapons, dex is the godstat but weapon-wise it's not even that good. Rapier is good but if you're melee not having plate means less AC, ranged is great with Sharpshooter but crossbows are just mediocre, and dual wielding is shit.

>>50786556
It's mostly for quickening EB. It's not truly broken, but it does shit all over pure warlocks.

>>50786556
Hex. Next turn quickened scorching ray + EB with the char on EB invocation.

File: 7fca43c568fbcdd994218d948a65f7a1.png (224KB, 944x706px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 944x706px

DMs of /5eg/, what song do you play when your BBEG shows up?

Found the perfect tune for my Death Knight BBEG, Caldan Redwood.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQMCAdMadMY

>>50786556
They're not. They were the cheese flavor of the month like 1.5 years ago, and they are very good at a single thing to the point of maybe seeming OP, but then you remember that it's only that one thing and it's not even across all levels as it is a multiclass. It's almost like people still saying wizards MCing 1-2 levels of fighter is OP cheese.

>>50786571
>>50786572
That does seem a bit strong but hardly "broken".

I guess it's a good thing about 5e if "broken" things aren't really that unreasonable.

>>50786586
It's just a huge amount of burst. One of my player did that combo at level 5 and it chunked through a boss encounter very easily. It helped that he rolled three crits though.

>>50786586
Like I said about warlocks, if a multiclass is a straight upgrade of a pure class it's something worth complaining about.

But honestly, better high level invocations would do wonders here.

>>50786401
Originally it only had the Displace ability (it's from the Tome of Beasts), but it's no fun for players to just be put out of the fight. I figured that was a nice way to make sure everyone can still contribute while still avoiding focused fire.

>>50786349
>Wild Mage
>no Blink
But I like it. 9/10 would allow.

>>50786586
It's not "broken" it's just on par with other primary damage dealers, and kinda shits on the warlock.

Simulacra/wish/polymorph abuse can be a lot more broken, to say nothing about necromancers with skeletal hordes, but they are all pretty high level.

>>50785802
A barbarian with maxed Dex/Con wearing no armour a shield and the shield spell via magic initiate (need the barbarian capstone to get 24 Con=+2 to AC).

It ends up at 28 AC.

>>50786692
Could be using a staff of defense + ring of protection as well.

>>50786600
GWF PAM variant human level 5 BM would like a word. d10+3+10 x 4 + 1d4+3+10 = 89.5 damage. Then you have 4 d8s that can either ensure you hit despite the bad attack bonus with GWF, trip them with the first giving you advantage on the next 4 attacks, and/or just add them to the damage for a total of 107.5 damage.
Even if that is less damage, the Sorclock also needs to Hex the round before to set up, and can't do any other concentration spells for a big fight as a result (as a sorc with twin that's pretty bad, you could be hasting two dudes and shit).

File: 2326dcc2ff6dc4bc2014dba2ad6c2762.jpg (418KB, 1272x705px) Image search: [Google]

418KB, 1272x705px

>DMing a group of friends
>everybody putting a ton of time into backstory
>everybody roleplaying really well
>all getting really invested in their characters and story
>they're only level 4
>they stumble across the BBEG's tower at the end of the last session
>they unknowingly enter it
>weren't supposed to really encounter it let alone enter it for a while
>they're probably all going to die and lose their characters

do you think god stays in heaven because he too lives in fear of what he's created?

>>50784572
When everyone else is using wooden sticks, rocks, and shitty bronze swords, your bronze splint is now plate by comparison. Don't treat the armor types in D&D as strict examples of their namesakes based on some arbitrary time period, but relative rankings of bulk and the protection they provide.

>>50786026
Bladesong just adds int doesn't it?

>>50784716
>wanting to play an evil faggot space marine
These are the last 13yos we should be catering to.

>>50784914
>hey man whatever happened to your sick power to clone yourself, stab niggas for 40 damage, and turn invisible all the time
>idk i learned about the power of love

>>50786709
I don't have the calculations on hand, but IIRC the damage evens out over 2-4 turns. BM fighter will have better burst for single turn, without a doubt (then again, you could multiclass fighter for action surge...).

>>50786711
If you aren't a shit DM you'll make a reasonably survivable scenario.

>>50785241
Technically its neutral because "only evil casters use such spells frequently" isn't as explicit as "its evil". We know its definitely not a Good act, but "frequently" is subjective.

>>50786711
Friend, when death is likely, the roleplaying gets better.

>>50786711
There's always a way out, anon. Besides, you can outright tell them that their characters can palpably feel the power emanating from the first guardian (?) they encounter. Better yet if you make them all roll a DC 15 Wisdom save to avoid becoming frightened. Really go hard on the "You are not yet powerful enough to deal with this, leave now or die"

>>50786709

I'm well aware that there's other classes and shit with very high damage dealing potential and with more consistency? He specifically asked why sorclock was a thing and I've given him an aswer. It's not like I was saying it's OP or anything.

No need to start crunching numbers senpai.

>>50786711
>the BBEG just has a tower in the middle of fucking nowhere without any guards and the PCs can stumble across it 20% into their mission
Like, have you never played an RPG
You need an arbitrary roadblock that prevents the party from getting near "the end of the game" before you intend

>yeah the boss lives on that island over there
>sorry but a storm took out all our boats, come back later when we've finished building a new one

>>50786779
He could also have the big threats not be there, and be repulsed by passive defenses they can't deal with yet. Just enough to get them turned away and wondering what the hell that was about.

>>50786764
At no point has animating the dead (with negative energy, as in to create undead rather than one of the other forms of reanimated creatures) ever been NOT an evil act.

You can be a Good necromancer. But that's because you're focusing on all the spells that manipulate life (positive energy) rather than unlife (negative).
And given that you have to recast Animate Dead literally every day for your zombie army, no one with a constant retinue of undead servants is going to be Good or even Neutral. Your ass is Evil after like a week of that shit.

>>50786454
>>50786329

Taking this a bit further refined.

>Fighter 1 for Heavy Armor and Shield
>Shadow Sorc 2
>Undying Warlock 3 (Undying for flavor; Undead might not be able to tell if you're alive or not) for Book of Shadows and Ritual Casting (The fact Sorc doesn't get it by default is shit) and EB cheese
>Shadow Sorc the rest of the way

>Take War Caster and fluff point blank Eldritch Blasts as beating niggas with a sword made of force


You'd be durable as far as AC goes but still have a Sorcerer hit die for the majority of your levels.

>>50786711
>>50786799
This. Your suggestion is even better than mine. Mechanical and/or magical traps, magic effects that make them walk in circles back to the entrance Guards and Wards please, I love that spell, Geas everyone into leaving, that kind of shit.

>>50786808
That's not necessarily how the alignment system works, RAW or RAI.

>>50786711
Have them meet a minni boss and leave info for them as in: ''You find a stack of papers you might want to read through....''

>>50786781
shit tier DM detected

A good aventure lets you know who the BBEG is and where he lives, but tells you he's really powerful and you should really find a way to destroy him before running inside his lair.

>see: Curse of Strahd

>>50786846
>he thinks there's actually RAW for alignment in 5E

>>50786864
Woah, everyone's so surprised that a namefag got shit so wrong.
>players are stupid
>tell them where the BBEG is and not to fuck with him
>make it very clear they shouldn't fuck with him
>they fuck with him because they are stupid
>well okay I guess we can just put this campaign in the trashbin, now what do you want to do fellas

>>50786878
We just recently included all of DnD in the discussion. Please try to keep up.

>>50786846
There is no alignment system now. Alignments exist, but if you want any rules governing them you have to go back to past editions. There also haven't been any changes to the cosmology which would alter how alignments have traditionally functioned or shifted, so you may as well just use stock 3X rules.

They stripped out the necessity of all that shit because most players and DMs are absolute retards who can't wrap their heads around simple concepts, but it's still a good idea.

Or are you the kind of moron who buys the "your character wouldn't do that" argument? Because that'd explain a lot.

>>50786896
but that's literally how it works in all of dnd
read a book nigga, there'll be a quiz when i get back from work

File: thankong.png (7KB, 112x112px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 112x112px

Using Homebrewery, but not a CSSfag really. Everything is pretty straight forward, but how exactly would I create the "Creature Stat" table I see in the Monster Manual and such?

>>50786907
Right, so you aren't going to alignment shift like >>50786808 implied, and animating dead isn't exclusively evil according to >>50785241

File: strahdbandwhite.jpg (36KB, 688x361px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 688x361px

>>50786581
I'm using this as Strahd's theme

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axhtmPLpOrg

>>50786946
There's a bunch of options at the top left there: "Editor | PHB | Tables | Print". Hover over PHB and them click on "Monster Stat Block".

>>50786814
>Ritual Casting (The fact Sorc doesn't get it by default is shit)
Balance wise maybe you can advocate it, but it hardly makes sense for a natural caster to have it by default.

File: feels-pylly-man.jpg (47KB, 478x431px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 478x431px

>spend hours making a character
>make a neat backstory
>make an interesting personality
>train a voice for the character
>realize it'll take a few weeks until I get to play it with my group due to shit

File: dab.png (32KB, 132x111px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 132x111px

>>50786889
I'm sorry for you anon, it must suck being of a lower race.

>playing with literally retarded people
>not enjoying TPKs when the party literally deserves it
>playing RPGs on training wheels
>putting arbitrary restrictions on where the PCs can and cannot go
>having such uninteresting villains that the only thing they will do is kill your PCs
>being so unimaginative that the only thing you can think of after a TPK is scrapping the campaign

File: Capture.png (29KB, 339x165px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 339x165px

Does Close Quarters Shooter work on spell attacks?

It doesn't specify Ranged Weapon Attacks.

>>50787084
Yes.

>be high level wizard
>cast Time Stop, max result on d4
>start walking away from enemy
>Delayed Blast Fireball
>Mirror Image
>Fire Shield
>Blink
>Incendiary Cloud
>Casting the last one makes DBF go off too, for a total of 16d6+10d8 fire damage in a 20ft radius
>coolguysdontlookatexplosiong.jpg
Man, when am I ever going to get a chance to play a high level game?

When I use Wish to duplicate a spell, what level is the spell? Level 9 since it's a 9th level spell slot?

>>50787280
Whatever you wish

>>50787280
You expend your spell slot to cast Wish, the spell effect you duplicate uses no spell slot at all. So it's basic level

>>50783523
Yes, but it's pretty stock-standard. Pun intended Only by the powers of humies and dorfs combined can they figure out how to make boomstick. But, since magic still fucking exists and their enemies are fond of using globes of missile invulnerability, they only give it to cavalry and use it for hunting. Some dwarven artificers claim that they can enchant their bullets to explode in a ball of fire, or deliver a lethal shock, but no one believes a word of it.

>>50787356
>Some dwarven artificers claim that they can enchant their bullets to explode in a ball of fire, or deliver a lethal shock, but no one believes a word of it.
Why not? I mean, if you can make a pointy stick do it why not a metal slug?

>>50787436
If enchantment of arrows is done with runes or such in his setting, I could see it being hard for bullets.

>>50787436
I suppose you're right. The point I was making is that magical explodey bullets are rare.

>>50786764
That's exactly the kind of shit necromancers tell themselves to try to justify their actions.

Nobody thinks of themselves as evil, even in a world where evil is an observable cosmic force. An evil spellcaster who raises the dead and consorts with fiends sounds exactly like someone on /tg/.

>>50787502
>That's exactly the kind of shit necromancers tell themselves to try to justify their actions.
They don't really need to, you'd have to be a special sort of retarded to think animating some dead body is "evil".

>>50787461
Maybe if you need to cover the damn thing in them, but even then it's nothing some fine etching can't fix. Besides which, he said alchemists which implies using magic materials not written enchantments. Maybe details on which materials are known to do what well could dissuade the notion.

>>50787549
>nothing some fine etching can't fix
Fine etching is pretty difficult, and the odds are good that any given enchanter might not have access to the means of it. Thats not even going in the potential issues of the runes needing a certain size etc.
Or possibly they usually use some special wood thats conducive to magic.

>>50783523
>Do you include matchlock guns in your setting?
The guns in my setting are kind of a technological mixup, having breech loading and primitive shells made from a flammable paper casing that holds the powder, shot and a fuse that acts as a primer, but uses a wheellock firing system.

Some advanced prototypes for the revolving cylinder exist, but they're not common by any means.

>>50785017
>>50786764
Important thing to remember, is that energy from the negative energy plane fuels undeath while energy from the positive energy plane starts or raises life. Just like how the feywild, shadowfell, and elemental planes have their own influences on life and the world, the positive and negative energy planes are the extreme pinnacles. It isn't that you are controlling a skeleton like a robot. It is that you are pulling negative energy from its plane and imbuing it into a skeleton. That is the same reason you can't dispel skeletons. The unlife has already been created. They will obey you for as long as they have to, but will murder any life forms they can. Because that's what the energy tells them to do.

>>50787639
Thats easily disproven as obviously incorrect by the existence of good aligned undead and undead made with positive energy. Not only that, a skeleton does, in fact, work like a robot.
Unless they are naturally arisen.

>>50787569
If anyone could pull it off, it'd be a dwarf craftsman. Your other idea is basically what I had in mind, they might need to dope the steel into a more magically receptive alloy.

>>50787639
>but will murder any life forms they can
Animated undead only defend themselves against attackers by default.

File: Reap On Ye Fucking Reaper Man.png (135KB, 615x413px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 615x413px

>>50787723
>this thread still on page 1
>hasn't even hit auto-sage

You should consider killing yourself, namefriendo

>>50787539
Necromancers definitely also call critics of their evil schemes retarded.

>>50787722
>>50787767
>Thats easily disproven as obviously incorrect by the existence of good aligned undead and undead made with positive energy.

What good aligned undead exist in 5e?

>Not only that, a skeleton does, in fact, work like a robot. Unless they are naturally arisen.
>Animated undead only defend themselves against attackers by default.

If you do not reassert your control over the undead then they wander off and do their thing. Not drop in to inanimate piles. Your control is what prevents them from wandering off and murdering people. And there isn't anything natural about undead rising. The animate dead spell specifically calls out that the force that animates the dead is a foul mimicry of life.

>>50787786
Sorry anon, I wished I'd have a "The Goym know" Shut it down"" with necromancers to appropriately answer to you, alas I do not.

>>50787802
>then they wander off and do their thing
>[Cititization needed]
PHb only says they stop obeying your command it says nothing about what they do afterwards.

>>50787802
>And there isn't anything natural about undead rising.
The Negative Energy Plane is a natural part of the multiplanar cosomology, spontanously risen undead are caused by negative energy ergo Spontanously risen undead=natural.

>>50787802
>The animate dead spell specifically calls out that the force that animates the dead is a foul mimicry of life.
And? Life isn't the only part of nature. Plenty of things in nature aren't alive.

>>50787802
This.

If the owner loses control (there are a number of ways) then the skeleton will be using the normal skeleton stats. While it might not actively hunt out a target, it will attack a living thing on sight.

It's evil because unless you're very careful, you've just summoned something that might kill an innocent person into the world. And all people will slip up eventually and accidentally leave behind a skeleton or two.

>>50787722
>work like a robot
>Int 6, Wis 8, Cha 5
Not as good as your average barbarian, but better than a golem and far from a robot.

>>50787843
>Flesh Golem
>Int 6, Wis 10, Cha 5;
Seems like it got the skelli beat.

Animate Dead
>It's evil because unless you're very careful, you've just summoned something that might kill an innocent person into the world. And all people will slip up eventually and accidentally leave behind a skeleton or two.

Fireball
>It's evil because unless you're very careful, you've just summoned something that might kill an innocent person into the world. And all people will slip up eventually and accidentally kill someone with their fireball.

>>50787843
Actually a Clay Golem has 3/8/1, which isn't really much worse.
Hell, a flesh golem got even better stats with 6/10/5 and its ALSO made with corpses. Yet somehow not evil.

>>50787823
"The creature is under your control for 24 hours,
after which it stops obeying any command you've given it."

This means it just becomes a regular zombie/skeleton.
Being an evil creature that will attack living things if living things come to it.
However, as I said in >>50787842 I'm not so sure the creature will definitely go and murder people, but rather stay in the same position (Say, hang around a crypt and not leave it) unless it's a skeleton/zombie of a creature that would always explore/wander in its normal life.

>>50787823
Read the monster manual

Habitual Behaviors. Independent skeletons
temporarily or permanently free of a master's control
sometimes pantomime actions from their past lives,
their bones echoing the rote behaviors of their former
living selves. The skeleton of a miner might lift a pick
and start chipping away at stone walls. The skeleton of
a guard might strike up a post at a random doorway.
The skeleton of a dragon might lie down on a pile of
treasure, while the skeleton of a horse crops grass it
can't eat. Left alone in a ballroom, the skeletons of
nobles might continue an eternally unfinished dance.
When skeletons encounter living creatures, the
necromantic energy that drives them compels them
to kill unless they are commanded by their masters to
refrain from doing so. They attack without mercy and
fight until destroyed, for skeletons possess little sense of
self and even less sense of self-preservation.
Undead Nature. A skeleton doesn't require air,

>>50787863
By the very nature of the PHB, the fireball cannot miss.

Not to mention, the fireball dissipates after use, even if it could potentially miss. Unless the fireball can grow legs and go and attack someone, this is a really bad analogy, because the difference is that a skeleton will remain behind for perhaps even half a century whereas the fireball won't suddenly appear again when an innocent walks by.

Even if the fireball grew legs, it isn't an evil creature.

>>50787863
The difference is that, assuming you had the best intentions for both spells and while you controlled them ensured no innocents would be harmed, when you finish casting a fireball the fireball goes away instead of shambling off to kill people.

>>50787890
>. The skeleton of a miner might lift a pick
>and start chipping away at stone walls. The skeleton of
>a guard might strike up a post at a random doorway.
>The skeleton of a dragon might lie down on a pile of
>treasure, while the skeleton of a horse crops grass it
>can't eat. Left alone in a ballroom, the skeletons of
>nobles might continue an eternally unfinished dance.
Doesn't sound like they go seek out living things to kill afterall. Tough shit that.

Yeah they attack people if left out of control ... and? Isn't that just even more reason for necromancers to be left alone so they can keep these things under control? Pretty sure your average necromancer has even more investment in his undeads being controlled than anyone else.

>>50787911
>hur hur i only read half.

Good bait

>>50787890
By that logic rangers with particularly dangerous predatory animals are evil. Thats some really flimsy logic.

>>50787921
I actively adressed the second half with my post. Are you already so mentally degraded that you can not comprehend a response unless I greentext what I respond to right above it?

>>50787910
I can agree with that.

However there are other spells with similar effects that somehow aren't evil: Conjure Fey or Conjure Elementals could cause some serious problems to bystanders.

Sure, if a nuclear plant blows up, it will fuck everyone up. But does that make nuclear energy pure evil?

Seems like the Evil thing is simply being reckless with Negative Energy. Destroy your undead after you're done, and it's fine.

>>50787890
>the
>necromantic energy that drives them
I always wondered why it doesn't say "Negative Energy" and says "necromantic" instead.
If I remember right they even had explained the Necromancy=Evil nonsense back then with the negative energy plane being semi-.sentient (to cover over how they changed it only to appease soccer moms). Why not keep going with that?

>>50787911
>Doesn't sound like they go seek out living things to kill afterall. Tough shit that.
>When skeletons encounter living creatures, the necromantic energy that drives them compels themto kill
Are you fucking brain dead or something

>Isn't that just even more reason for necromancers to be left alone so they can keep these things under control?
>The creature is under your control for 24 hours, after which it stops obeying any command you've given it.
I repeat, are you fucking braindead? It is literally impossible to keep them under control longer than 24 hours.

Keep in mind, the necromance in the vast majority of cases IS a living person. One that probably needs to sleep. And when you are sleeping, you are not controlling your undead.

Can you fucking imagine how many roving undead are out there because a randomass necromancer decided to raise five or ten skeletons to work on building his new tower, fell asleep, and got fucking slaughtered in the night because they finished the tower and he was the nearest living thing? Or how many diligently locked them in cages at night, set them to work the next day, and then realized "oh shit, I don't have a way of killing these things" once the 24 hours were up and either had to book it or get killed?

Frankly, while it seems like an easy source of cheap labor, if you don't take serious precautions while raising undead you're going to get yourself killed.

>>50787927
No, you're failing to understand the difference between
>I tamed a wild beast!
and
>I just created an evil creature from a peaceful corpse!

If the ranger goes around breeding evil creatures or turning creatures evil, then sure, that's a good analogy. And you know what? That's fucking evil.

>>50787975
>Are you fucking brain dead or something
It says it attacks living creature, apparently you are too braindead to comprehend the difference between Attack on Sight and Actively seek out. Maybe try learning to read?

>>50787975
>It is literally impossible to keep them under control longer than 24 hours.
>To maintain control of the creature for another
24 hours, you must cast this spell on the creature
again before the current 24-hour period ends
Maybe you should have tried actually reading the rules before emberassing yourself.

>>50787995
>No, you're failing to understand the difference between
>>I tamed a wild beast!
>and
>>I just created an evil creature from a peaceful corpse!
whats with necromancers that don't create any undead and only control already existing ones?

File: seinfeld1.jpg (32KB, 442x480px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 442x480px

>>50788008
>What's the deal with necromancers that don't create any undead and only control existing ones?

>>50787995
>If the ranger goes around breeding evil creatures or turning creatures evil, then sure, that's a good analogy.
Doesn't need to be evil, a animal that kills a human in its territory is Neutral because it follows its nature according to the aligment rules. And a undead does the same thing. Also just following its nature. What makes it more evil?

>>50788018
Not sure whats the confusion?
Undead often spawn on their own, through negative energy or shadowfell influence.

>>50783523
How much should it cost for a PC to have a standard weapon improved to +1 by a blacksmith?

>Not all necramancers are evil
PHB P.118
You cucks can stop your retarded argument now.

>>50788052
Depends on the cost of tuition for four years at the nearest magic college because a normal blacksmith doesn't make magic weapons.

>>50788027

Re-reading the skeleton fluff in the MM I found this
>Whatever sinister force awakens a skeleton infuses its bones with a dark vitality, adhering joint to joint and reassembling dismantled limbs. This energy motivates a skeleton to move and think in a rudimentary fashion, though only as a pale imitation of the way it behaved in life.
>An animated skeleton retains no connection to its past, although resurrecting a skeleton restores it body and soul, banishing the hateful undead spirit that empowers it.

>banishing the hateful undead spirit that empowers it

It appears that Animate Dead doesn't just 'animate' a non-living thing. It pulls energy straight from the Negative Energy plane, shapes it into a serviceable spirit, forces it to obey your commands, and puts it into the corpse.

>this is not okay but making pacts with literal demons is


Can't we just agree that Necromancy is "playing with fire", just like using fiendish powers for good endeavours is?

>Gobins

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s66g-FFGksI