/5eg/ Fifth Edition General:

>>50880770
The secondary campaign i was in i played a Ghostwise halfling information broker, built in telepathy is baller for passing along informationm.

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

1B, 486x500px

Repostan this in case its useful to others and because I had fun making it

File: 1475174808990.jpg (293KB, 1024x822px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 1024x822px

> tfw cleric
> tfw the only attacking cantrip is save or damage
> tfw never hit
> tfw no magic items that improve your chance to hit with it exist
> tfw bless doesn't work on it

>>50880851
Pick up a hammer or ask your god for a level of warlock

>>50880851
Chop some fools up with your martial weapon proficiency

>>50880851
Play a sun soul monk instead.

>>50880867
What martial weapon proficiency?

>>50880882
The one that the Only Worthwhile Domains give you, cretin

anyone know where I can find the old Dragons of War PDF for Dragonlance?

tenth for KOBOLD DRAGON-HUNTING PARTY

Trying to make a paranoid PTSD vet character that has seen some shit, man. Uses a heavy crossbow. Race will be variant human for the extra feat, need crossbow expert to be usable. Background obviously soldier.

Now for class, I am torn between a Ranger/Hunter and a Fighter. Both battlemaster and UA Sharpshooter seem a good choice.

Waht do

>>50880841
hume is literal shit
what the fuck

Can you turn Warlock spell slots into sorcery points if you multiclass?

>>50881083
Rogue for sniper and special ops
Ranger for scouts and gorilla warfare
For everything else, good ol' Fighter

>>50881141
Any sharpshooter in there?

>gorilla warfare
Topkek.

>>50881199
desu I didn't like the UA sharpshooter very much since it has some overlapping with feats, but it's fine I think.
If I wanted to be a fighter sharpshooter I would just pick battlemaster with the actual sharpshooter feat and call it a day.
The sharpshooter is supposed to be the more snipey fighter, but overall I think the rogue fits it better, since he gets into place quietly, fires that one shot who does a truckload of damage and then gets out. Being a sharpshooter firing four times a round seems odd to me.

Reposting cause I'd like more opinions:

>party walks down corridor with Egyptian-style paintings along the walls, 4 humans figures on each side
>each figure holds or wears the symbol of a different god of knowledge and/or magic and has a name (or number) written beneath
>at the end of the corridor is an angular room with 9 tapestries decorating the wall
>each tapestry has one of those human figures, but each on a different pose and there are no religious symbols
>they hear a deep voice say "those who show respect in the way of Mystryl open the path to knowledge"
>none of the figures in the corridor holds Mystril's symbol
>party has to cross-reference the names (or numbers) to discover which of the figures in the tapestries is not represented in the corridor, she's the one making the right gesture
>if they open the doors while making the right gesture, they pass unharmed
>if they don't, mummies rise from sarcophagi behind each tapestry and attack

How's this for a puzzle? It feels like they'll figure it out too easily.

>>50880806
Guess I should shoot for easy rather than difficult, since I haven't been doing a lot of puzzles in the campaign so far. I have 6 players, though. I assume the booming voice should hint them there's a puzzle, but then again I probably shouldn't assume what players will do.

>>50880851
Use bless on all the other party members, sit back and laugh to yourself.
Or take a level of wizard for the shield spell, rituals and green flame blade + booming blade.

>>50881101
>>50880841
Agreed, humes seem to be weaker than 5e standard (they're simply a worse version of humans) while the other races seem to be significantly better than baseline.

Anyone else think the 5e races are crying out for a point buy system? We've already got the basic currency in place thanks to the feat system; one feat or a stat +2 or a stat +1/+1 is a point. Starting from that, you could create a series of racial feats and work from there. Ideally the system should acknowledge the difference between "get this feat" and "get a feat of your choice" and should have feats be a bit less abstract and more specific than the feats that characters can learn. Similarly, +1 to all stats is only a little better than +1 to two stats of your choice. (I'd be happy to see a feat which gave you a +4 or more to your weakest stat.)

In any case, your standard human has 2.3 or so feats worth of features (whether it's a good trade or not, the Skilled feat prices a skill proficiency at 1/3 of a feat), a Hume has 1.3, and every other race in that list has about 4 points worth of features. Let Humes start with four extra feats of their choice and you're getting closer to balanced, which tells you how far off being balanced you are at the moment.

>>50880851
Bane works with it, though. Once the cleric in my party made someone blind (Blindness/Deafness) for a full minute because of Bane.

>>50881453
Bane is a shit spell, though.

File: hothead.gif (30KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 250x250px

>>50881489
He's on fire!

>>50881452
there's this stuff here which weights races features, giving a guideline to messing with races
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ViqLSEN67mmd2Lo_OJ-H5YX0fccsfI97kFaqx7V1Dmw/edit

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eiNfWAq14MKhXgLEsxnYYQjdX2Ku4cib1tP4UHis1J0/edit#

>>50881139
Nothing says you can't.
Warlock spell slots are still spell slots.

>>50881576
If for some reason you have only a few levels of sorcerer, your max sorcery points can actually be less than what you get in exchange for your warlock slots.

>>50881452
What if I were to change it to all ability scores increase by 1, and then a select 2 get an extra +1 AND they get the free feat

>>50881641
Sorc level doesnt cap sorc points

>>50880770
>Paladin UA is out!
Boring paladin shit.

>>50881508
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1vq1kz6PRAbw5LHy6amH-bNb4OuB8DBXL1RsZROt03Sc/htmlview

A revised version, a little more in-depth.

>>50881702
now that's too strong
just use variant human's +1 to two, 1 skill and 1 feat

So Archfey, Fiend or Great Old One?

>>50881309
The UA sharpshooter could be worthwhile in a game where feats are entirely optional; speaking of which, are feats more worthwhile than an ASI or vice versa or are they roughly on par?

>Being a sharpshooter firing four times a round seems odd to me.
Why's this? They should fire more times? Cos I agree.


After all the UAs have been released, Wizards should release a round two version of those classes.

>>50881822
Undying Light

>>50881825
> I want to be a warlock, but not really.
For what purpose?

>>50881796
Ah no wonder its so weak. I misinterpreted Variant Human as being replace ability score increase with the free feat OR the +1 to two OR the skill.

>>50881823
Most feats aren't worth it, but those who are, really are. Like sharpshooter. And you'll hardly find a table where feats aren't allowed but UA is. So it's better to just go battlemaster for le trick shots with sharpshooter feat for added damage.

>>50881705
It does, RTFM.

>>50881796
So variant human is roughly as good as these other races?

>>50881825
Undying light would have been a better Sorcerrer bloodline but warlock has better utility with invocations.

>>50881850
Variant Human is generally better than standard races, and the races in this pdf are somewhat more loaded than the official stuff, so I think they're in a similar position, if a bit on the weaker side. Assuming you choose your feat carefully, of course.
Maybe give one more skill or +1 on top of that just to be sure.
But that race with 4 resistances tingle my bones.

>>50881822
Fey is cutest

So starting a campaign at lvl 7 next week.

Playing a Variant Human with the Alert feat.
Sun soul Monk 6/ Undying Light warlock 1

Stats are:

10 Str
16 Dex
10 Con
10 Int
16 Wis
13 Cha

Sage background
Medicine, Athletics, Accrobatics and Survival skills.
Tool proficiency: Healers kit
Instrument: Flute

Backstory is a guy who was raised by his father in the deep woods and knows jack shit about society.
Had to use a warlocks tome to understand light based magic and continue his training as a Sun monk.

File: 800px-David_Hume.jpg (112KB, 800x970px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 800x970px

>>50881101
>>50880841

>hume is literal shit

You need to be more skeptical, man.

Any news on today's UA, what's going to be about, etc?

>>50881837
Personally, I want to play one where it's flavored as receiving the powers from an angel, myself.

>>50882016
>today's UA

It doesn't exist anon, it's Cristmas break

File: 912052ee6a75c462b96537433a502712.png (906KB, 1135x534px) Image search: [Google]

906KB, 1135x534px

>>50882016
is it supposed to be anything in particular?

>>50882018
>They said every monday on December will get an UA
>Christmas break
Woah, once again they lie to our faces and get with it

>>50882017
There's a class for you, it's called cleric.

>>50880851
It's almost as though you picked the least offensively oriented class in the game.

>>50882017
>Flavored
Flavored Soul is your subclass anon

How would you implement an Archmage character option (and equivalent for other classes)?

>>50881489
>minus 1d4 to enemy attacks and saving throws
>shit
I'm sorry for your ignorance, anon.

>>50882092
>>50882101
If he wants to play it as a warlock, let him.
As long as he doesn't go all magical realm on the 'receiving the powers' part.

>>50881083
Will a ranger's spellcasting fit the flavor you're going for?

>>50882092
Cleric is directly God-powered tho
Angel would either be a patron, so UL or reflavored feylock maybe, or a bloodline, so favored soul

>>50882101
kek

>>50881918
Is bone tingling a good thing?

>>50882113
I wouldn't make it a subclass or a prestige class, just a title for the foremost members of that class. Maybe if you really wanted to get fancy you could make it a feat with a prerequisite of a high level in that class.

>>50882173
As long as your timbers don't shiver

Do you allow higher than 15 in point buy?

>>50882207
If MAD classes or character concepts are involved, yes, after all you can't buy more than a 15 so you don't have the problem of SAD classes having 18 on stats or similar like in previous editions.

>>50882207

I've given that some thought, and I don't think it's beneficial to allow more than 15 in point buy, but I do think it might be worthwhile to allow less than 8 in point buy.

>>50881311
>It feels like they'll figure it out too easily.
That's a good thing. Easy, entertaining puzzles are better than the alternative.

>>50882207
Nope. Minmaxers should not be humored.

Is there any fluff from 4e you miss?

>>50882176
Now that I think of it, it would make a good epic boon.

>>50882207
>>50882217
Oh fuck, I somehow read 27 instead of 15. Sorry, no, 15 is ok.

Aasimar Sun Soul Monk Undying Light Warlock?

>>50882207
Roll stats and these questions need not be answered.

>>50882207
No. This rule was placed there for a reason.

>>50882268
There is hardly any fluff from 4e to begin with. They didn't even finish their own setting.

>>50882173
It's a strange, probably harmless thing. But you still think that maybe something isn't right about it.

>>50882207
20 INT gnome wizards at lv1. 20 CHA half-elf bards. This stuff is a problem.
If I were to make any change to point buy, it would be a few more extra points, like 30-33 to make a more well rounded character.

>>50882271
There's some wizard related boons, like extra lv9 spell slot or making a spell into a cantrip. I would just roll with that and leave Archmage for a title, to be given to the best wizards around, with the benefits being purely social, like influence, being able to use facilities at will and such.

>>50882297
What do you do when someone rolls shit and another person rolls godly?

Is it worth it to get Eldritch Kinght 3 for a monk wants a fighting style action surge and Shield spell?

>>50882268
No, because it's all still there whenever I want it.

>>50882382
>Fighting style
>On a monk
Which one may I ask?

Also no, is not worth it, you delay your ASI, your extra attack our unarmed damage, your ki. Monk is not very multiclass friendly.

>>50882366
The player who rolled shit sacks up.

I'm playing two characters in two different campaigns, both rolled. One has a primary stat of 14 and nothing else above a 12. The other rolled two 17s (now raised to 18) and a 16.

I've had plenty of enjoyment in both games.

>>50882409
The plural of anecdote is not data. If you can enjoy being weaker than the rest of your party, good for you, but not everyone likes to roll with that.

>>50882409
Might sound weird but some people don't like to be outclassed by everybody else and be dead weight

>>50882366
Then either the situation resolves itself quickly when one or either of those characters dies, or you're playing the game wrong by combining classic high mortality DnD with modern continuous characters DnD.

Stat rolling and minimum customization character building is great for a high mortality game, because you can make lots of characters quickly and don't feel sad when they die horribly from a failed save or from opening the wrong door. Point buy, feats, skills, and other pre-play character customization is great for a low mortality game, since ideally all that paperwork gets you more invested in your character and gives you a greater sense of agency over your characters' successes than simply rolling dice alone would. Do not mix these systems. No one wants the character they love and spent ages making to die to a failed fortitude save. No one wants to play through an epic, year long, world-spanning campaign as a wizard who can't cast spells.

>>50882409
>This system that can create unfun situations is fine, because it doesn't always create unfun situations. I don't mind, so you shouldn't mind.
And my cat only shits in your shoes some of the time. Yeah, no.

>>50882478
this, to be honest, famiglia
but you could still make 8 INT wizards with no problem at all

Anons, I've been trying to make a new dwarf subrace based on the Forgeborn Dwarf race from 4e, which were basically dwarves who sacrificed a feat to gain a little resistance to all four of Acid, Cold, Fire and Lightning and who could do bonus damage with a melee attack 1/encounter. How overpowered is this current writeup?

Forgeborn Dwarf:
Ability Score Increase: +1 Charisma
Born of Creation's Forge: A Forgeborn Dwarf is considered to be Acclimatized to any extreme environment it encounters, from extreme temperatures to high altitude to deep water to any other environmental extreme. As part of this, Forgeborn Dwarves are also immune to Exhaustion gain imposed as a result of their environment.
Primordial Sustenance: A Forgeborn Dwarf doubles its Constitution modifier for determining how long it can hold its breath and how long it can go without food and water.
Tempered Through Creation: A Forgeborn Dwarf that takes Elemental Damage (Acid, Cold, Fire, Lightning, Necrotic, Radiant, Thunder) can reduce the amount of damage it takes by an amount equal to its Constitution modifier (minimum of 1 point).

>>50882409
You must be playing one of the classes that aren't stat dependent, then.

If you played, say, a monk, you'd honestly be a sack of shit with those stats.

A fighter on the other hand can do okay.

>>50882297
For what purpose?
Rolling stats in order, then sure, there's actually a purpose there.

>>50882207
Not unless you increase the number of points you have to buy with. It would nerf MAD classes by giving them effectively lower stats than people pumping over 15s into their best stats.
Monks already don't need that nerf.

>>50882382
Not really. You don't gain enough benefit from action surge, you only get two shield spells and unless you're using plate armour or something you're not getting much from fighting style. In the end, you're giving yourself less monk features and less ki to spend on those monk features.

>>50882462
You're only dead weight if you're bad.

File: 1454910473279.jpg (51KB, 492x557px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 492x557px

>>50882037

Has anyone actually played a Kensai monk yet? Open Hand has been on my short list since the game came out, but the idea of making a halberd monk is pretty arousing

>>50882382
If you already have 6 monk levels then go ahead.
Dueling is so far the best fighting style for monk if you ignore Mariner from UA.
Use spells that don't rely on your casting stat.
So booming blade, mage hand etc...

>>50880841
>Viera paladin/druid1
>+2 dex, because you don't really need strength for anything other than wearing heavy armour because you're using fucking charisma to fight with
>+2 cha
>quarterstaff with charisma shillelagh + shield
>has gnome's best feature - advantage on all non-physical saves
>35ft speed
The only problem is they don't get PAM at level 1 like a variant human would. But then the humes suck here anyway.

>>50882590
The class is best off using a shortsword so it doesn't loose Martial Arts.

However with a Halberd you can dip a level into fighter for GWF.

>>50882553
I'd limit the elemental resistance to the same four types the original protected against. Not so much of a balance thing but it doesn't make as much sense.

The +1 Charisma is... fine, I guess. I have no idea what the forgeborn is supposed to be like so I can't say if the flavor and resulting synergies are what you're looking for.

Beyond that it's maybe on the weak side. Might want to throw in that bonus melee damage thing.

>>50882616
>Dueling is so far the best fighting style for monk
Dueling doesn't work with unarmed attacks though

>>50882635
Is that the case? I'm not sure that was intended, given the twitter noise.

>>50882647
Monks can still use weapons

File: Alcohol is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.jpg (266KB, 600x739px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 600x739px

>>50882449

>The plural of anecdote is not data.

That's surprisingly snappy. People probably feel an urge to tell you to shut up on a fairly regular basis.

Aside from that, you're right. Carry on.

>>50882635
I thought they Twitterrata'd that problem away

>>50882647
But it does work with one handed monk weapons

>>50882627
PAM?

>>50882680
Polearm Mastery.

A paladin staple.

Even works with shillelagh.

>quarterstaff, 1d6 weapon
>duelling fighting style, +2 damage, essentially like a 1d10 weapon now that works alongside a shield
>shillelagh allows paladin, a stat hungry class, to use charisma for pretty much everything

>>50882679
They could use Great Weapon Fighting with a quarterstaff if they wanted. Or they could go kensai and use whatever the fuck

>>50882513
True. 5e got rid of the minimum stat requirements and extra spells from stats, and if you pick your spells cleverly you can avoid offering your opponents saves or having to make attack rolls. It'd be an odd experience, playing the 3 in every stat guy. Also odd, the fact that he'd be better as a Wizard than a Fighter, i.e. the class that RPGs put people into when they can't think of anything exciting for them to do. (Looking at you, NWN2.)

>>50882647
It works on onehanded weapons.
It's still +4 damage per turn on a monk.

>>50882660
>>50882673
Haven't read any of that and actually played the class as written.

Basically with a shortsword you get to be a monk and get the extra damge still.
With a Hallberd it's best to dip fighter and go Dex based GWF since the pummel attack is made with the weapon so have fun with your greatswords...

>>50882673
No, Crawford says "Kek, no, fuck monks", Mearls says "I have no fucking idea of the rules, but yeah why not". Crawford, as the guy who makes the ruels is probably the one you should believe.

>>50880770
>http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/paladin-sacred-oaths/
>oath of treachery
Sith confirmed

>>50882409

This. One of my favourite characters ever was a sub-par Fighter with 3 in Wisdom. I just decided to make it work, built her as a tank and later took levels of Psion. She's infamous in the group for unshakeable, dog-like loyalty and single-mindedness and always being there to take the biggest hit and remaining standing.

Rolling is so good, because it forces you to think outside the box instead of going cookie-cutter. I like characters to have flaws and strengths.

>>50882714
Fugg. Empty Hand it is, then. Gonna wing chun some niggas

>>50882714
Actually he said the kensai was fucked from the get go. Whether they'll come back to the concept is unclear.

>>50882772
That's because monk is fucked from the get to go, it only works fine in their narrow as fuck style, give them access to GWM and they become broken, so they have to nerf them somehow and that came in the form of "Sure, you can pick Greatsword but now your unarmed attacks are shit, and if you want +2 AC with gretasword you have to deal some shitty attacks with unarmed strikes".

>>50882627
Ha, crazy thing is I'm giving all my players a free feat so they could do exactly what you're describing with PAM

>>50882757
Stormwind fallacy

>>50882806
Not exactly, he's not equating poor stats to good roleplay or vice versa. He just took a poor stat and involved the character's concept with it in an appealing way.

>>50882757
Dogs have high Wisdom.

Low wisdom means confusing people for each other, not recognizing rotten food, not recognizing dangerous situations, and so on.

>>50882858
It's all relative. A dog has 5 while a squirrel has 2

>>50882797
Personally I'd make a list of otherwise kind of suboptimal feats and give those out as possible feat options.

Actor (no increase), Athlete (No stat increase), dungeon delver, durable (no stat increase) elemental adept, grappler, keen mind (no increase), linguist (no stat increase), martial adept (non battlemasters), observant (no stat increase), skilled (only two skill proficiencies), spell sniper (PHB cantrips only for learning, but affects non-PHB cantrips), skulker, weapon master (no stat increase).

>>50880841
Are you on cocaine?

>Bangaa end up with +2, +1, +1 in addition to other features
>Hume just a less-good version of the human we already got
>Nu Mou only have white and black magic training, no wild or beast magic training
>Including Ronso but not Gria

In essence, kys.

>>50881083
>ranged character in 5E
Your only two options are either assassin or battlemaster, mostly dependent on if he was a sniper/scout or more standard rifleman.

>>50880770
I have played a kobold swashbuckler, a ghostwise druid, I have seen 3 bladesingers, I've used the shit out of the extra epells, and this weekend I am doing a one shot as a battlerager. No arcane domain clerics or masterminds though.

>>50882757
>Rolling is so good, because it forces you to think outside the box instead of going cookie-cutter.
Isn't that only the case when you roll in order? If you want to play a Wizard and you aren't rolling in order, you're never going to get a stat layout that doesn't have Intelligence as its highest stat unless you choose to do that, and you can choose to do that with point buy just as easily as rolling for stats.

Something I've though would probably work would be a system where you roll 4d6k3 for your stats, in order, and then you can make any one of your stats into a 16. You'd still get the issue where some characters would be objectively better than others, or where the Rogue rolls a higher Con than the Fighter and invalidates the guys invincibility fantasy and party tank role, but you'd also get situations where a person needs to figure out what a surprisingly low/high stat means for their character.

I mean, you'd get those sometimes. Every time a GM I've played under has insisted on rolling for stats its been an uninspiring collection of 12s and 13s for everything. "I am the person every man believes that they are. I am... Slightly Above Average Man."

>>50880851
You have a d8 hit die, armor proficiency, and weapon proficiency. Quit being a bitch.

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

1B, 486x500px

>>50881822
Neither. We Machinehead.

>>50881823
>Why's this? They should fire more times? Cos I agree.

Not who you were talking with, but no. At least in my mind, a sharpshooter is less about drowning the enemy in a hail of gunfire but rather about making precise and unerringly accurate strikes. Something that the battlemaster and rogue are already more than capable of. When I pick an archetype called sharpshooter, I'm expecting a priority to accurate and precision rather than raw rate of fire.

As is, the Samurai out of that UA works better if only because a tweaked form of Fighting Spirit represents harnessing that inner focus to make your attacks strike with precision and skill. Steady Aim is just pure garbage, and a Samurai with Sharpshooter is twice the shot that the Sharpshooter with Sharpshooter ever will be.

>>50880882
>this guy went cleric but didnt get martial proficiency
>complains about shitty offensive abilities

File: Thief with Tavern Brawler.webm (2MB, 852x480px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 852x480px

What's some creative uses for Fast Hands aside from the usual "slap a bag of Caltrops down"?

>>50882757
If this were your reason for rolling you would be okay with rolling for where you place each stat instead of what the stat is. Basically you are saying, 'I wana play a sub optimal combination, but I want my stats to be good enough that I can still be the best evarr. This way I can optimize the specialness of my snowflake."

>>50883027
If your DM lets you sneak attack with thrown weapons then acid and alchemist fire become pretty viable options.

>>50882714
Still, you can use martial arts while holding a kensei weapon. Holding =/= Wielding, is all.

>>50883090

I don't see why you wouldn't be able to sneak attack with a thrown dagger. It has the finesse property after all. Probably not with a spear or a hand axe though, since they're specifically melee weapons that are being thrown, and not ranged weapons. Same for the items, they're thrown as improvised weapons, so no finesse, and they're not specifically ranged weapons.

>>50881489
Its not shit, but considering the standard flow of combat, its almost always better to bless allies.
The biggest argument is that generally baned enemies will die over the course of the spell. Bless will almost always have all blessed targets still alive when it ends, whereas with bane, youll soon kill the first enemy, then another, and after a short amount of turns, youll be maintaining concentration for 1 baned enemy.

That being said, there are circumstances where bane could be great. Maybe you have one chance to poison a difficult enemy, and you need every advantage to have them miss the saving throw.
Or maybe you get ambushed by a lot of enemies, a high level bane could give all 6-7 enemies those effects, but with only 3 allies, you couldnt get the same usage from a bless.
But assuming you cast them at the same level in an even encounter, bless will give more use

>>50883122
I know, but I could see a DM ruling that thrown weapons are ranged. Even if you don't get sneak attack, setting people on fire as a bonus action is pretty fun. You can even add oil on subsequent rounds.

>>50883095
Read the twitters anon

What's the big deal about a Kensei losing Martial Arts? The first bullet of Martial Arts and the second bullet of the Kensei do essentially the same thing, so there's one. The third bullet of Kensei does more or less the same thing as the third bullet of Martial Arts, though potentially better (auto hit versus roll to hit), even though it doesn't scale (which you still get Flurry of Blows if need be). The second bullet of Marital Arts is covered in the second Kensei bullet.

So what exactly are you losing? A scaling bonus action unarmed strike? Just use Flurry of Blows.

>>50882757
Rolling hardly encourages this. Putting a 3 on wis just means you're willingly saying 'Yeah, okay, if someone throws hold person on me I'll just die, and I accept that.'

Rolling in order however allows for this, because min maxers won't put their 3 in something useless like intellect. Because they can't.
Nobody would ever put a 3 in con otherwise.

>>50883073

Optimization is not bad. You can optimize even with shit stats so that you are not dead weight. In the case where you roll nothing but fives, I would let you re-roll, because that character would be unplayable and not fun. My DM said he'd let me re-roll my stats after I ended with such absolute shit, but I went and made it work in the group. You don't have to always be the best or the most powerful member of the group, but rather work within the group so you can progress together and have fun.

>>50882858
> not recognizing dangerous situations

That's basically the character I rolled. Sometimes I've veered dangerously close to That Guy territory with "hilarious antics" as a result of stubbornness bordering on insanity, but I've managed to stay on the good side and my group seems to love it. I've been blessed in that I've never had to play in a nightmare group like people here on /tg/ often describe.

>>50883221
Kensei requires you to make an unarmed attack to get one of it's benefits. Without MA that's bullshit

>>50883221
>What's the deal
Basically if you want to get +2 AC from Kensai you have to deal a shitty attack with shitty to hit and shitty damage because it's an unarmed damage and you're wielding a non monk weapon. Also Flurry of Blows becomes useless with kensai.

The problem is that it's a subclass that fucks up the main class and that's bad design.

>>50883221
>Just use Flurry of Blows.
>With Kensai
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

>>50882642
Hmm... I don't know about the elemental thing, because I always saw Thunder, Necrotic and Radiant being part of the "elemental" damage types myself.

Huh. You really think the elemental damage reduction is weak enough that, even when combined with all of the core dwarf traits, they ability to do +X elemental damage 1/long rest (short rest?) wouldn't make it overpowered?

>>50883221
Kensai weapons (for the most part) AREN'T Monk weapons.
If you wield a NON Monk weapon your unarmed damage uses obligatory STR both to hit and damage and deals 1+Str.

Now, think about that for minute and lets see if you can understand the problem by yourself.

File: 4703-7395-11435.jpg (16KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 320x240px

>>50882366
Accept it, just like in real life?

Some people are born retarded. Deal with it.

>>50883271
But you can, check Mike Mwarl's Twitter, he intended for martial arts and kensai weapons to work together

>>50883334
Mearls has not fucking idea of how the rules work, his words mean fucking nothing, it isn't the first time that Mearls says something that goes against rulings and months later just goes with "lol, made a mistake", Crawford is the guy behind the rulings you should listen to him even when he's a dick for the most part.

Has anyone used some kind of voice modifier for roll20 games? Ideally one that's push to talk, so it'd only apply voice effect while talking in character.

I feel like it might help me as a new-ish player get better as rping a character if they don't have my exact voice.

>>50883176
I'm gonna give you the same answer Crawford always gives. Read the fucking book.

>>50883262
>>50883303

Wielding =/= holding. The third bullet on Kensei weapons only requires holding.

>>50883373
oh so you go with the "it isn't in the book therefore is not official yet" well, is a valid way of dealing with stuff, but see Kensai isn't official either so...

>>50883409
This. My monk has been using non monk magic weapons for a long time and getting the benefits from them without "wielding" them because nowhere says you should wield them to use their abilities

>>50883409
>Wielding =/= holding

Page citation for the difference?

>>50883489
There's none and devs didn't state the difference but you'll see 1001 anons say there's one.

File: errata.png (8KB, 228x45px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 228x45px

>>50883489
PHB errata.
This is referring specifically to two-handed weapons, however I think it fits since you only need one open hand to Unarmed Strike

>>50883513
There only states that you can hold a 2hd weapon with one hand, it doesn't say that wieldign isn't holding and viceversa.

>>50883554
It takes two hands to wield a lance if you aren't mounted.

>>50883513
That says "attack", not "wield"

What does the most recent Sage Advice say, because us bickering over kensei will never end

I made a weapon creation kit:

Starting Die Size: 1d8 Simple, 2d4 Martial
Die steps: 1d4-1d6-1d8-2d4-1d10-1d12-2d6


+2 die size
* Two-Handed


-2 dice size
* Ammunition (range x/4x)


+1 die size
* Heavy
* Loading


-1 die size
* Light
* Reach
* Defensive (+1 AC Shield)
* Finesse
* Thrown (range x/3x)
* Versatile (increases dice size by 2 when two-handed)


The Special property affects die size based on the effect.


Certain properties do not work together: Heavy+Light, Heavy+Finesse, Versatile+Heavy, as well as obvious combinations that simply can't work (e.i. Two-Handed+Versatile, Two-Handed+Light, etc.)

>>50883605
Just don't use it until they release the finalized version (if they do). You're not going to get any errata until then.

>>50883612
And with this ruleset, I made this weaponset:

SIMPLE
Cleaver - 1d6 slashing - light
Shortspear - 1d6 piercing - light
Club - 1d6 bludeoning - light

Sickle - 1d4 slashing - light, finesse
Dagger - 1d4 piercing - light, finesse
Half-Staff - 1d4 bludgeoning - light, finesse

Tiger Claws - 1d4 slashing - light, special: This weapon does not fill the hand slot while equpped. While the hand slot is filled, this weapon cannot be used to attack.
Punch Dagger - 1d4 piercing - light, special: This weapon does not fill the hand slot while equpped. While the hand slot is filled, this weapon cannot be used to attack.
Cestus - 1d4 bludgeoning - light, special: This weapon does not fill the hand slot while equpped. While the hand slot is filled, this weapon cannot be used to attack.

Handaxe - 1d6 slashing - versatile (2d4)
Spear - 1d6 piercing - versatile (2d4)
Quarterstaff - 1d6 bludeoning - versatile (2d4)

Mace - 1d8 bludgeoning - n/a

Great Club - 1d10 bludgeoning - two-handed

Tomohawk - 1d6 slashing - thrown
Javelin - 1d6 piercing - thrown
Light Hammer - 1d6 bludgeoning - thrown

Light Crossbow - 2d4 piercing - ammunition, two-handed, loading

Shortbow - 1d8 piercing - ammunition, two-handed

Sling - 1d4 bludgeoning - ammunition

Balance Blade - 1d4 slashing - finesse, thrown
Throwing Knife - 1d4 piercing - finesse, thrown

>>50883605
The most recent sage advice, by Mearls, say "Lol I don't have the slightlest idea how this works but yeah monk weapons = kensai weapons".

Previous one, by Crawford the dude who MADES THE RULINGS, says no, kensai weapon =/= monk weapon and if you use a non monk weapon you have to deal with the problems it creates on martial arts but it's ok because it's playtest and making bad options is part of the learning.

>>50883626
cont.

MARTIAL
Man-Catcher - N/A - reach, special: A Medium or small creature hit by a Man-Catcher is restrained and grabbed until it is freed. A Man-Catcher has no effect on creatures that are formless, or creatures that are Tiny, Large, or larger. While this weapon is restraining and grabbing a target, the weapon cannot be used to attack. A creature can use its action to make a Dexterity or Strength check with a DC equal to 8 + the wielder's profiency bonus and STR modifier, freeing itself or another creature within its reach on a success. A creature restrained by this weapon takes 1d4 piercing damage at the beginning of their turn.

Whip - 1d4 slashing - light, finesse, reach

Shotel - 1d6 piercing - finesse, Special: ignores shield bonuses

Sabre - 1d6 slashing - light, finesse
Shortsword - 1d6 piercing - light, finesse
Tonfa - 1d6 bludgeoning - light, finesse

Falchion - 1d8 slashing - finesse
Rapier - 1d8 peircing - finesse
Shortstaff - 1d8 bludgeoning - finesse

Arming Sword - 1d8 slashing - light
Light Warpick - 1d8 peircing - light
Baton - 1d8 bludgeoning - light

Battle Axe - 1d8 slashing - versatile (1d10)
War Pick - 1d8 piercing - versatile (1d10)
Warhammer - 1d8 bludgeoning - versatile (1d10)

Broadsword - 2d4 slashing - n/a
Morningstar - 2d4 piercing - n/a
Flail - 2d4 bludgeoning - n/a

>>50883649
cont.


Glaive - 2d4 slashing - two-handed, finesse, reach
Longspear - 2d4 piercing - two-handed, finesse, reach
Longstaff - 2d4 bludgeoning - two-handed, finesse, reach

Halberd - 1d10 slashing - two-handed, reach
Pike - 1d10 piercing - two-handed, reach
Polehammer - 1d10 bludgeoning - two-handed, reach

Longsword - 1d10 slashing - two-handed, finesse
Dueling Spear - 1d10 piercing - two-handed, finesse
Battle Staff - 1d10 bludgeoning - two-handed, finesse

Greatsword - 1d12 slashing - two-handed
Lance - 1d12 piercing - two-handed
Maul - 1d12 bludgeoning - two-handed

Greataxe - 2d6 slashing - two-handed, heavy
Greatspear - 2d6 piercing - two-handed, heavy
Greatmace - 2d6 bludgeoning - two-handed, heavy

Double Sword - 1d6 slashing, 1d6 slashing - double, two-handed, finesse
Urgosh - 1d8 slashing, 1d6 piercing - double, two-handed
Blade and Chain - 1d6 slashing, 1d4 bludgeoning - double, two-handed, finesse, reach

Balance Axe - 1d8 slashing - Thrown
Trident - 1d8 piercing - Thrown
Throwing Hammer - 1d8 bludgeoning - Thrown

Chakram - 1d4 slashing - finesse, thrown, Special: recall
Boomerang - 1d4 bludgeoning - finesse, thrown, special: recall

Hand Crossbow - 1d6 piercing - ammunition, loading, light

Heavy Crossbow - 1d12 piercing - ammunition, two-handed, heavy, loading

Longbow - 1d10 piercing - ammunition, two-handed, heavy

Where can I find info on Way of the Sun Soul?

>>50883626
>All those weapons that say "lol fuck you monks, kek"

>>50883684
SCAG aka Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide.

>>50882884

A dog has 12 Wis anon.

>>50883641
>Previous one, by Crawford the dude who MADES THE RULINGS, says no, kensai weapon =/= monk weapon
He said that.
> if you use a non monk weapon you have to deal with the problems it creates on martial arts
I don't think he actually said that.
>but it's ok because it's playtest and making bad options is part of the learning.
He did kinda imply this though.

Think this through reading what the book says. Your monk is level 3. You take the Attack action. During your action you draw a trident. You throw the trident. Immediately after your Attack action, you use a Bonus Action and use Flurry of Blows. You can use Martial Arts for these unarmed strikes.

>>50883710
It does not

>>50883717
Now you have to recover your trident

>>50883726
Fighter 3 Eldritch Knight Weapon Bond

>>50883738
So to use my class features I now need to multiclass into Fighter?

Fucking Kensei

>>50883738
Which is a bonus action that you used on Flurry of Blows

>>50883626
I'm curious why you've buffed the spear, quarterstaff, and more importantly the shortbow?

Also Broadsword is strictly superior to longsword. Same for morningstar and flail.

But then you've gone and nerfed the glaive.

>>50883664
Wait, two-handed finesse weapons? What the fuck are you doing? Get that shit outta here.

>>50883685
At early levels, yeah, basically.

File: 1477085300193.jpg (132KB, 1113x718px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 1113x718px

>>50883745
>Complaining about how you have to deal with the same problems everyone else has to.

>>50883751
Action surge

>>50883221
The pummel ability is honestly complete trash unless you know an enemy is almost dead or their AC is ridiculously high and you're really luck to have hit in the first place or you somehow can trigger it against more than two enemies or you don't have martial arts (in which case, it's brilliant, but apparently you still do have martial arts, so it's shit.)

>>50883779
>the same problems everyone else has

Having to multiclass Fighter to use my class features?

>>50883753
I'm using the system I posted previously about. I did not buff or nerf anything, I built weapons using the posted system.

>Wait, two-handed finesse weapons? What the fuck are you doing? Get that shit outta here.
Why though?

File: humbug.jpg (143KB, 640x667px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 640x667px

>>50882037
Sorry, sir, we'll get right on that for you.

>>50882695
Isn't tomelock the only way to get charisma shillelagh? Magic Initiate(druid) just gives you wisdom shillelagh.

>>50883789
Action Surge doesn't give you Extra Bonus actions, you only have ONE and ONE only per round.

>>50883800
Having to recover a thrown weapon.

>>50880770
Anyone play in the Living Arcanis 5E setting?
I really don't know what to think of it. It seems off somehow, and I don't really know why. I can't think of any real hard reasons why I don't like it, but it just seems like it's trying too hard to be a particular thing and I'm not interested in it.
I don't know how to explain it. It's the same sort of stuff that turned me off of LotFP except Raggi has no sense of proportion.

>>50882714
Or you could do what fucking works for you at your fucking table.
But hey, if you really need the word of god on this shit, don't forget to sacrifice a goat the next time you go to twitter. All the proper ceremony must be observed.

>>50883813
The Viera race posted upthread gave them the ability to use Charisma as a druid's spellcasting modifier.

>>50882672
Nah, they don't. I just get triggered by stat rollers my man.

>>50883753
Also,l no, the broadsword isn't superior top the longsword, or the versatile weapons in general, as they work differently in this weapon set. The die increases by 2 sizes when 2-handed, but decreases 1 die size for having the versatile property. So, if you actually want a versatile weapon, you can have it, but otherwise you can have a slightly more powerful one-handed weapon.

>>50883826
>Or you could do what fucking works for you at your fucking table.
Yeah, that would be awesome, but there's this person called GM who, stupidly him, does what rules say instead of what I say.

>>50883718

>does not
Does too.
Cite me the stat block saying otherwise, because all the ones I have say it does.
Does Volo's have an entry for fucking pugs or something?

>>50883822
I wouldn't have needed to throw it if holding a sword meant my hands stopped working

>>50883834
Longsword is for sword-and-boarding. 2d4 is strictly superior to 1d8.

>>50883838
Oh, I didn't realize, you're a player!
Sorry, I thought you were the person at the table that matters.

>>50883839
I think he's talking about Mastiff, MM p. 332 or PHB p. 307

>>50883854
Longsword is not a 1d10 two-handed versatile weapon.
The comparison you're looking for is to the battle axe, which is a 1d8 versatile(1d10) weapon. If you're solely one-handing, yes, it's better, but that's obvious. If you aren't going you use the versatile property, why use a versatile weapon? Use the best weapon for the job: a weapon made for one-handed use.

>>50883612
I assume the +1 AC property ones require shield proficiency.

Well, yeah, I was going to parrot on about heavy+finesse but then it looks like that was not included.

>>50883886
Sorry.
**Longsword is now a 1d10 two-handed finesse weapon

>>50883894
I don't even think I used it for any weapons I made...

>>50883874

That creature has a Wisdom score of 12.

>>50883894
But, no, I don't think so... Maybe I should switch it to -2 weapon die, or just remove it altogether.

>>50883928
Indeed.

>>50883939

That was my entire point.
Mastiffs have 12.
Wolves have 12.
So unless there's countermanding evidence in a book I don't have, the standard Wisdom Score for dogs in 5e is 12.

>>50880770
>paladin oath that just makes you really good at hiding and running away

>>50883753
I seriously want to know WHY two-handed finesse weapons are a problem, cause I don't see a reason.

File: Double_sword.png (649B, 32x32px) Image search: [Google]

649B, 32x32px

>>50883664
>Double Sword

>>50884072
It's a pole with a sword on each end. Yes, it's a fantasy weapon, I know. You don't have to include it if you think it's dumb or just unfitting. I included it for diversity's sake and as an example of how the special property could work.

File: 128909-1194010885.jpg (67KB, 1280x1024px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 1280x1024px

>>50884095
Well you can't stat it without stating its older brother now can you.

>>50883916
Yeah, well, the restrictions dashed my hopes of making overpowered weapons.

Once I'm done with whatever thing I'm doing I might try to see if it's still abusable.

Versatile is still shit, but that's no surprise. Then again, you can use versatile instead of two-handed provided your items don't require two-handed, right?

>>50884070
Something about the rogue getting a straight damage upgrade instead of using rapier and rapier accessories.

File: 1481502032697.jpg (173KB, 569x569px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 569x569px

how do i pick just a few ideas for a one shot
i have way too many ideas

>>50884108
But of course.
Triple Sword - 3d∞ slashing - Special: this weapon is indestructable and omnipotent. As a no action, you can attack 3 times.

>>50884114
>Versatile is still shit, but that's no surprise.
Yep.

>you can use versatile instead of two-handed provided your items don't require two-handed, right?
I'm not so sure what you mean, but I will guess...
Feats and traits that require two-handed weapons generally do work with versatile weapons being wielded in 2 hands, yes. I don't know about items, but I suspect they would work the same.

>>50884070
Because one of the few things that prevents Dex from completely eclipsing Str from the game is using two handed weapons. If you can get GWM on a Dex build, Str is only good for carrying capacity (which barely anybody enforces) and Athletics (which you can sub for Acrobatics in some circumstances).

Basically, two handed finesse weapons make Str obsolete completely.

>>50884266
Two-handed =/= Heavy, and there are already heavy two-handed weapons that use Dex. They're bows, and they have their own power attack feat.

>Little did he realize, the war was long over.

>>50884210
Pro tip: To save time, roll all 3 dice of damage for the triple sword together so it only takes one eternity to count up rather than three.

The whole wield/hold thing on monks is just simply stupid, why having a longsword in their hands suddenly makes monks have a neurism and forget how to punch/kick?

Woah, is really having 2 attacks with weapons go to unbalance the game? even if they deal 4d6+30 (GWM) + 2d6+10 they're still below fighters, paladins, rangers and barbarians and they wasted an ASI so that means less to hit and less AC

Fucking wotc and their tardiness, man

How would you fix Sorcerer? As of now the "best" way to play one is to go Warlock 2 and just be a Wizardy Warlock, but that's not only lame in it's own right but steps on Warlock's toes.

File: IMG_0013.jpg (119KB, 498x716px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 498x716px

I want to give one of my players a ring thats actually a tiny mimic. I want it to be a bit cursed, bu not like its just going to eat his finger and be a shit cursed item. What should it do? Take 1 hit point from him forever while he wears it, be irremovable, and shudder when its near big treasure? I kind of want it to do something else but thats my current idea.

>>50884310
>As of now the "best" way to play one is to go Warlock 2 and just be a Wizardy Warlock
totally wrong
the best way to play a full caster is just go full caster so you stay on curve
warlock gives sorc some discrete tricks, sure, but imo its not worth it, and it comes with is own drawbacks (being late to spell progression).
the "best" way to play a sorcerer is to just go full sorcerer.

>>50884305
>why having a longsword in their hands suddenly makes monks have a neurism and forget how to punch/kick?
It doesn't. People just don't know how to read good.

>>50884317
Any 1 or 20 he rolls deducts his proficiency bonus from the 8th next roll he makes thereafter

>>50884310
Allow them to add more than one metamagic to their spells, maybe a number up to their CHA modifier. Wizards may be able to cast all the spells, but they can't cast them as good as you can.

Give them a signature spell that they can apply a single metamagic to for free.

Give them 2-3 more spells known.

>>50884336
Why is there a rule to begin with, why it needs to be stated that if you wield a non monk weapon you become retard? that was made to avoid what exactly?

>>50884349
tee bee haych faam the Investiture spells should be Sorcerer only

>>50884355
>Why is there a rule to begin with,
because "People" includes the D&D design team

>>50884355
>why it needs to be stated that if you wield a non monk weapon you become retard?
It doesn't. That clause really is retarded to include. It serves no actual purpose.
>Why is there a rule to begin with? that was made to avoid what exactly?
To avoid potential balance problems that turned out to never be problems.

>>50884266
How though? The highest damage non-finesse weapon deals 2d6, while the highest damage finesse weapon deals 1d10. With my weapon set the way it is, it also makes duel-wielding viable for STR characters, giving them the option of weilding weapons that deal 1d8 damage, as opposed to the 1d6 the DEX characters can use.

STR characters have higher damage die weapons available to them, that's why you would use them. They are not obsolete.

>>50884286
You can't get great weapon fighting on bows, though. And that's at range. With two handed Dex weapons, Dex owns melee and ranged.

>>50884417
It still has to be Heavy, not just Two-handed. Just add a rule that Finesse weapons cannot be Heavy.

>>50884433
With my rules, they already can't be.

>>50884210
>>50883612
Oh, wait, the two-handed property is +2 dice.
Yeah, that still works out. Versatile is still shit rather than a direct upgrade of two-handed.

The main thing I'm seeing, though...

A greatsword would be 2d6.
A greatsword with +1 AC or reach or thrown would be 1d12. Direct buff of the greataxe. Some people prefer 1d12s to 2d6, although those are pretty rare (if you somehow, for some reason get savage attacker, or if you have lots of crit dice). Otherwise, it's an average -0.5 damage for a property that's usually -1 damage to get, and people who aren't fighters would be using 1d10 or 1d12 thrown weapons too much.
I guess 'heavy+thrown', 'heavy+defensive' should be disallowed, and reach should be -2 dice.

Also, heavy crossbows would be 1d12s and light crossbows would be 2d4, with hand crossbows being their usual 1d6. Shortbows would be 1d8 and longbows would be 1d10. Slings would be correct at 1d4. Overall, perhaps ammunition needs to be -3 dice size.

Rogues would be using either 1d12 two-handed finesse weapons or 1d10 two-handed thrown weapons or 1d10 reach finesse weapons. I suppose you need to make two-handed and thrown not work together either, and two-handed plus finesse.

At least, those should keep it within the current boundaries of the game.

>>50884310
Well on a mechanic level i let them get a few things.

Light armour proficiency, simple weapons proficiency and a 1d8 Hp die.

Think about why a Sorcerrer is a Caster?
Do they work their asses off in a study or have to weed it up with some old geezers in the woods?
Nope.
They can do it because it's in their blood.

File: Interview-questions-square-image-1024x768.jpg (252KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

252KB, 1024x768px

I'm planning on running a level 14-level cap campaign, as a cap to the last 6-odd years of gaming my group has done. How does 5E handle high level play?

Also, are there any good epic-level fan supplements?

>>50884564
>How does 5E handle high level play?
Even when you're high level you don't feel high level if you know what I mean. 5e is grounded as fuck, no high power silliness even when you reach the highest levels
>Also, are there any good epic-level fan supplements?
None

>>50884564
5e is more lower-magic orientated, so while high levels are more powerful they're not dramatically more powerful. Still, you get access to features you wouldn't otherwise be able to get at lower levels, and characters generally are more options and more than enough room for feats and such.
The game balance can be quite unwieldly at level 17/18/19 and 20, so be careful of playing games that start at those levels.

You can use lower level monsters even against high level players due to how thing work.

Casters tend to have a lot more spell slots and thus don't really need to rely on cantrips very much. Barbarians have plenty of rages, monks get plenty of ki every short rest to stun with and... Warlocks get.. An extra spell slot, I guess.

If your group is tired of playing the lower levels over and over or simply just wants a bigger arsenal of abilities and you can pace things properly so it isn't just the mages throwing out their highest spell and then having a long rest and then throwing out their highest spell, it should work fine enough. Obviously be careful of throwing anyone new to 5e into that end of the spectrum because there may be any number of things they don't understand, especially if they're a caster.

How shit an idea is this as a class/archetype feature?

>Inhuman Will
>You can add half your CHAmod rounded down to your STR modifier


The idea as of now is that for things like Bladelocks they force their body to go beyond it's limits via anime bullshit since in 5e CHA=Willpower

>>50882553
Building on from my desire to work this into balance, I've been trying to come up with some good feats to really bring up the "elementalness" of these dwarves, and I could use some help with them.

Like, how overpowered is this feat?

Feat: Urdunnir
Prerequisite: Dwarf race and Forgeborn subrace
Effect: Gain the following racial traits:
* Bones of Stone: Once per long rest, use your reaction to gain +1 Armor Class in response to being hit by an attack. This AC bonus lasts until the end of your next turn.
* Roots of the Mountain: Once per short rest, you can use your action to enter a stance. Until you end this stance as a bonus action, you are Slowed, but have Advantage on saves to avoid being Pushed, Pulled, Stunned, Knocked Prone or rendered Unconscious.
* Earthwalker: You gain the Earth Glide movement trait at a speed of 10 feet. This speed increases to 20 feet at level 10.

>>50884705
Just get rid of bladelocks instead. They get Chain, Tome or Chain. Because Chain is the best

>>50884310
Sorcerer and warlock are best as multiclassers usually. Neither of them is as good as a wizard when going full caster, and instead you want some of their features combined with other features (such as smiting or charisma shillelagh on paladin or metamagic to twin booming blade or something).
It's not stepping on warlock's toes at all, because you're honestly more of a warlock by being warlock2/sorcererwhatever, spamming eldritch blasts everywhere. Instead, it's just saying 'nah, sorcerer doesn't exist, only a better warlock.'

To fix them, they need a buff that isn't something that synergizes well with the main sorcerer multiclasses. Sorcerer needs new, unique spells, some more spellslots and some new spells known. Problem is, this makes them more like a wizard, but it's the only way I can think of right now that wouldn't make sorlock overpowered. Of course, you should shut down sorlock (remove spell->sorcerery point conversion?) and then greatly expand metamagic, but, eh.

>>50884334
That only pays off at later levels. You're not taking advantage of anything that makes sorcerer not a worse wizard. By making proper use of some of the features by multiclassing, you're now something more unique than a worse wizard.

>>50884500
That's getting closer to making them a warlock, though, considering warlocks are light armour proficiency simple weapons 1d8 HP, and that only really means a dragon sorcerer will be using the 1d8 HP and not light armour or martial weapons.

>>50880867
>Game of 5e a year ago
>Players don't add Strength or Dex to their attacks, only proficiency bonus
>Enemies still use strength/dex plus proficiency bonus
>Never found out whether the DM thought that's how it was supposed to be played or just an attempt at 'balancing the game'
>Everyone got pissed when I mentioned that we should be able to actually hit things.
>Most of my characters died as a result.

On a related note, I played an Undying Light Cleric in a game of d&dwiki, took Sacred Flame because it seemed more in character. Now that I think about it, I was effectively playing a 5e version of Grendel. He exploded on impact with the ground and his corpse was eaten by wolves.

File: wizards.jpg (36KB, 434x440px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 434x440px

>>50884779
imo the best thing would be to completely revamp the Sorcerer into a close range (not necessarily melee, 30 or so feet) magic sledgehammer, where the Warlock is a long range scalpel and the Wizard is a multitool.

>>50884705
I rate this level 11 fighters multiclassing out into warlock to get +2 strength out of ten.

It doesn't solve the problem warlocks have that is trying to run into melee combat is just begging to get them killed unless they multiclass or really make use of armor of agathys or something.

If the ability can't be multiclass abused and drives warlock further into 'glass cannon melee sorta-caster gish' then that might be fine, but especially if people insist on rolling for stats (why?) and the warlock player has overly good stats, they'll be treading on the already endangered strength-main-users feet as they go around moving boulders even the barbarian is crying over.

A feature more like lifedrinker sounds like it'd be better, rather than making them simply stronk.

>Wizards get spells known
>Warlocks is reliable damage and specialized at will abilities
>Sorcerers get metamagic or more spells throughout the day

>Spells known more than makes up for no metamagic
Wizards fill every niche at once all the time. Warlocks are reliable but can't do shit without resting. Sorcerers should have either a lot more damage to compensate for their lack of options or improve metamagic a fuckton. They could also get archtypal spells so that a Sorc20 doesn't have less spells than wizard 8.

>>50884470
You gotta work within my system, friend. Forget all the vanilla weapons, this system does not work with them, it replaces them.
Maybe I should be specifying every combination that does not work, and I really should just get rid of the defensive property.

>Also, heavy crossbows would be 1d12s and light crossbows would be 2d4, with hand crossbows being their usual 1d6. Shortbows would be 1d8 and longbows would be 1d10. Slings would be correct at 1d4.
Yes, as they all should be.
>Overall, perhaps ammunition needs to be -3 dice size.
Then the Sling couldn't exist.

>>50884839
As of now I was actually considering a feat actually.

Something along the lines of
CHA to STR, however this cannot increase your STRmod above +5

It'd still have some issues with people abusing it like you mentioned though, I doubt it'd be balanced unless it was a high level class ability to discourage multiclass cheese.

>>50884470
I would aslo suggest that the sneak attack feat be changed to not include two-handed weapons.

File: james-zapata-warlock.jpg (212KB, 900x1200px) Image search: [Google]

212KB, 900x1200px

>>50884779
>That only pays off at later levels. You're not taking advantage of anything that makes sorcerer not a worse wizard. By making proper use of some of the features by multiclassing, you're now something more unique than a worse wizard.
if anything sorc becomes a worse wizard at higher levels due to access to a more limited high level spell list and spells known.
no caster in 5e comes into their own in the first tier, and at level 5 sorcs get some crazy tricks they can pull with metamagic that wizards can't keep up with.
whats your criteria for "sorc as worse wizard"?
wizards ARE better than sorcs, and ever other caster, no doubt, just because they get to know so many spells. but its a pretty small difference you won't notice in your gaming group, i don't think. and on top of that, sorcerer has problems, yes, but its not so much weaker than wizards that you would be retarded to not pick a wizard or a sorclock.
getting higher level spells is way more important to a caster than being able to eldritch blast, unless your party is like all casters that don't do damage, in which case fine sure play a warlock or a sorclock, but in reality casters don't really do that good of damage in my experience except in specific circumstances, so delaying getting more powerful spells is way worse than trading 2 levels just to be able to get a good cantrip, if power is what you're after.
THAT SAID sorclock is good, no doubt, its powerful, but its not the best.
i guess from your perspective, DPR is king, so sorclock is king, which is fine, but theres so much more to do as a caster.
also i want to note i'm not trying to insult you or call you retarded or anything, i just don't think trading higher level spells is worth it in the actual course of playing the game just to be able to sometimes doublecast eldritch blast.

>>50884907
>-1 for thrown
>no -1 for ranged
this sucks ass

>>50884995
That would make ranged weapons overtly OP, with a heavy crossbow dealing 2d6 damage, and a longbow dealing 1d12 damage. It doesn't work within the system.

How about something like
Invocation: You deal double damage on melee cantrips.
As a 5th level invocation for bladelocks instead of thirsting blade?

And for survibability.
lifedrinker now on top of adding +Cha it also heals you +Cha per attack.
Shadow armor on top of 13+Dex armor gives you, if you're bladelock, profiency on medium and heavy armors.

>>50883255
>opt to do less damage but gain AC
Not seeing the problem here. Every other class can opt to do NO damage and gain AC in the form of disadvantage (Dodge).

All these whiny niggas just want an archetype that is flat-out better at Monking than a Monk.

>>50884966
Sorlock isnt even king of DPR, fighters, rangers, paladins etc can deal way more damage...Sorlock wins in the long run, sure, but 5e combats are short af, so Novaing is king and therefore Sorlock, even though it's a good damage dealer, is no king.

>>50885053
It's an rchetype, it's supposed to enhance the class, not take away it's defining class features (MA damage, Flurry)

Fucking necromancer doesn't take away your cantrips or spell slot recovery

>>50885039
>>50884995
Or did you actually mean to type "ranged", instead of ammunition? "Ranged isn't a property, but a catigory. I suppose I could have a lower standard die for ranged weapons (1d6 for simple and 1d8 for martial), but again, then the sling couldn't exist as is.

>>50885053
>I can't read
No, people just one an archetype that works in synergy with the main class, there're infinite possibilities of making something balanced without goign "kek fuck your martial arts, unarmed damage, etc while also forcing you to use them"

Also, wrong, other clases have defending style, that gives them +1 to AC always without affecting their damage. Other classes have resistance to damage without affecting their damage, etc. You compare dodge (a feature EVERY class has) with kensai last feature, and those are not comparable because one is a character feature and another a subclass feature.

>>50885071
yeah i agree with that, but if you ARE going to make a dpr caster, its a good way to do it

>>50885087
>Don't mind me, just making a Wizard archetype that adds +2 AC, +1 DC, and an extra damage die to every spell. I'm just enhancing the class!
Kensai isn't an enhancement, it's a flat-out replacement. Without a trade-off it's bullshit.

>>50885053
>All these whiny niggas just want an archetype that is flat-out better at Monking than a Monk.
Show me the math, you all niggas come with the same "it's flat out better" but you never post math or if you do you compare Kensai vs Default Monk (without Subclass). Show me the fucking math.

And I'm asking because one of those "whiny niggas" posted the math in previous threads and it was pretty much balanced

>>50885139
>wrong, other clases have defending style, that gives them +1 to AC always without affecting their damage
Hey, retard, they can't take Dueling (+2 damage) or GWF (rerolls) if they grabbed Defense.

>>50884584
>>50884658

Alright, thanks. Looking at the rules, it looks to be the way you're describing them, so we should be good.

File: 4873-10054-22063.jpg (19KB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 480x270px

>>50883359
that's just pathetic, anon

>>50885159
>No other subclass gives you trade-offs, it just improves the defeault class in different ways than other subclasses of the same class...but somehow Kensai should be backwards as fuck and ignore this because

>>50885180
Why am I not surprised that a guy who thinks Kensai vs. no-Archetype Monk is an invalid damage comparison when Shadow and Open Palm don't actually increase damage by any means other than making you more likely to hit (giving you advantage) ALSO failed to note all calculations where Kensai was clearly superior? And now you're trying to deflect by saying "nuh uh, you show the math", knowing I'm not going to go searching through an archive or run a bunch of numbers you'll just bitch about.

So no, YOU show ME the math and prove that Kensai and Monks have damage parity.

>>50885185
Dueling or GWF aren't defining features like Martial arts nor is anybody forcing you to use heavy weapons with a shield if you want to have the +1 to AC

>>50885245
Shadow gives you an extra attack (reaction) if a friend hits an enemy which increases your DPR
Open Palm trips enemies which gives you Advantage which increases your DPR (On top of motherfucking Quivering Palm that deals 10d10 or infinite damage)

Also Shadow monk is not a damage dealer, same way EK isn't compared to Battlemaster

>>50885245
You said they were flat-out superior, burden of proof, fagget.

>>50883612
Edited:

...

-1 die size
* Light
* Reach
* Finesse
* Thrown (range x/3x)
* Versatile (increases dice size by 2 when two-handed)


The Special property affects die size based on the effect.


Certain properties do not work together: Heavy+Light, Heavy+Finesse, Heavy+Versatile, Versatile+Light, Versatile+Thrown, Versatile+Two-Handed, Two-Handed+Light, Two-Handed+Thrown, Ammunition+Reach, Ammunition+Finesse, Ammunition+Thrown, Ammunition+Versatile
Also, the Loading property ONLY works with weapons with the Ammunition property.

>>50884266
Gwm works with heavy weapons, not 2 handed.

>>50885315
GWM works efficiently with heavy weapons, but any melee weapon can get benefits from GWM (extra bonus action attack on crits and fell enemies)

>>50885214
I'm not implying I want a voice thing to make mine sound any "better", but one to make certain "in character" voices easier.

Like I dunno, a spooky ghost sounding echo-y, or a knight having a slightly muffled voice from a helmet.

>>50885273
At least my voice is better than yours you pasty bald bitch

>>50885094
Fuck the sling friendo, ranged weapons should do less damage than melee period.

>>50885280
>LEVEL SEVENTEEN FEATURES
Absolute desperation.

And since you want to bring that shit into play, are you seriously going to say that Shadow teleport-advantage isn't equaled by Kensai rerolls, or that Palm trips are more of a boon for you than the party? Read how Flurry and Open Palm work:
>AFTER TAKING AN ATTACK ACTION, you can bonus action to punch a guy twice
>when you hit with a Flurry attack, you may force a target to save vs Dex or fall prone
All of your normal attacks come before the Flurry, and your first Flurry hit can't benefit from prone because it's the one causing it. That means you get a whopping ONE PUNCH every round with advantage courtesy of your feature. Kensai 17 already lets you reroll, which is basically advantage.
PRO TIP: that last line is the one you should quote and say "wah you can't compare a level 17 feature to a level 3 or 6 one" while conveniently forgetting this is exactly what you're doing when you compare other archetypes' late-level shit to the stuff a Kensai does the moment it shows up

And Shadow Monk isn't a damage dealer? That's a funny joke coming form a guy who just said that advantage = DPR+. You can't even agree with yourself, holy shit.

>>50885363
They already do deal 1 damage die less... I guess you're right, though. That does allow dex characters to deal 1d12 damage, which is too much for them.

>>50883359
This could be neat on certain kinds of characters: AKA, dragonborn and warforged and orcs and shit with deep weird voices. Also girl characters. Would certainly help me get into character.

>>50885414
What an utterly mediocre voice.

>>50884907
Sling stuff isn't a problem. The only problem is whatever your system is is saying that all non-two-weapon-fighting rogues get a free +2 damage or +1 damage and reach, which is kind of a big deal when an arcane trickster will get booming blade and booming blade at 10ft before bonus action running away.

So, unless you're playing a completely different game, you're giving martial classes a buff (which isn't necessarily a bad thing), particularly rogues. Also, even then, reach should probably still be -2 dice.
Also, you'll have to define when certain feats such as 'polearm mastery' come into play. Only on reach weapons? But then what about the people who wanted PAM+Quarterstaff?

>>50884923
Oh, well, I suppose that's fine enough. Though it's now sort of discluding rogue from the general martial buff.

>>50880770
none of the but because the masters i have play with, like D&D 5e by their campaigns & modules.
They dont want to know about more options.

>>50881841
Holy shit how retarded are you?

>>50885437
Yeah that's one of the reasons I was considering it, (though in the opposite direction), it's rather difficult for me to do a voice fitting for a Gnome or other high pitch characters since I'm a Bass.

>>50884966
Yes, the sorc can spend more than half of their metamagic points to twin the 'haste' spell OR convert all their points into a single level 3 spell. That's neat, when you consider a wizard has to take a short rest to get an entire level 3 slot back.

However, font of magic combined with metamagic combined with dragon sorcerer isn't much better than wizards having their wizardly spell slot regeneration and a level 2 archetype feature.
Sure, they do different things and sorcerer might be just a little better here, but the problem is..

Then you consider their spellcasting.
The wizard then simply knows more spells (Up to all on the wizard list), has access to a greater variety of spells and can change which spells they have around. This is where it becomes unbalanced. But this is also what differentiates sorcerer, so fixing this only just makes sorcerer a different wizard archetype.

To really best the wizard, the sorcerer has to really make metamagic go the extra mile. How do they do that? They become a sorlock or a sorcpaladin.

You won't get those higher level spells in the first place unless you're doing a high level campaign. And then, if you're playing sorlock, you're not playing to be a wizardly spellcaster - you're forsaking spells for the sake of EB spam.
You have to compare that EB spam to something such as a ranger or fighter. Neither a ranger nor fighter has an ability to knock back enemies 10ft on every single hit, which is sorlock's defining point..

>>50885516
>i hope he really did return his book and stop posting
i hope he actually read his phb and became a better player and or dm
the truth is neither of those things happened

>>50885245
Not him but lets assume Kensai = Monk and see if it's broken or not.

If kensai = Monk weapons you can use Martial Arts fine, so your attack (including +2 AC) will be:

2d6+Dex+3 (sharpen blade?)+1d8+Dex (Extra attack to get the +2 AC)+2d8+Dex (FoB)

Assuming Dex = 5
Prof = 5
Average damage vs 16 AC is = 32.7
+2 AC
Ki spent 1 per round +3

Open hand monk
4d8+4xDex
Using Open Hand technique
Average damage vs 16 AC = 26.6 (without OPT) or 32.75 (with OPT)
Ki spent 1 per round

So damagewise they're on par
Kensai is ahead in AC with a +2

>>50884966
>>50885534
And you see, the problem here is 'well, why don't you be a sorcerer instead of a sorlock and be a proper caster?'
To which the answer is
'Then play wizard if you want to cast spells,'. Simply because the wizard has so much more spellcasting utility. Sorcerer is more of a combat wizard, which means they have to use metamagic on what spells they have. Yes, they might do a bit more in combat, but are they really a caster? Unlike other casters, they've used all their spells known on combat (usually) so they're really just a different flavour of DPS with maybe a buff or two to give out.

>>50885445
>The only problem is whatever your system is is saying that all non-two-weapon-fighting rogues get a free +2 damage or +1 damage and reach
As you point out later, I'm suggesting sneak attack not work for rogue, because it doesn't make sense, and it happily restricts rogues.
>which is kind of a big deal when an arcane trickster will get booming blade and booming blade at 10ft before bonus action running away.
Yeah, I'm likely going to switch reach to -2.
>Though it's now sort of discluding rogue from the general martial buff.
It makes no sense for a rogue to use a two-handed melee weapon.

File: 0ae1c67ef3075b676fde029b52ac9cdd.jpg (214KB, 658x1956px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 658x1956px

>>50885534
whatever, i just don't think a sorcerer has to "best" a wizard, they're very close in power EXCEPT in terms of a wizard's versatility in terms of number of spells known and their huge list of spells they can lean from, a problem which sorclock doesn't solve.
anyway whatever you're fine in my book. i mean what you're saying, i can agree with generally.
wizards really screwed the pooch with eldritch blast, and the no save 10 foot push per hit is absolutely retarded.

>>50885390
Is not a damage dealer compared with others, are you retard? not all subclasses should be equal in every field ever, they should focus on certain stuff and of course if you deem the most important one of those fields you're going to think the other subclasses are shit.

Hurr durr Bards are shit, they aren't tanks therefore are shit because I think tank is the only important field ever.

>>50885558
From calculations I did on a spreadsheet somewhere, the damage from getting +2 AC is still ahead of normal monk's damage. Which is only natural, considering it's the same as normal monk only one of the martial arts dice has been replaced with 2d6 and they could potentially get GWM if they're feeling crazy.

The deal with kensei is it doesn't use ki, so while flurry of blows may actually cause open palm to pull ahead of kensei not using flurry of blows in terms of damage (They should do anyway) and in terms of being able to prone and knock targets about, kensei isn't using any ki to get their +2 AC every round.

>>50885584
I think the deal is that sorcerers could use some more utility that doesn't clash with wizard. It'd be cool if they had at-will spells such as 'create water' that hopefully can't be abused too much.

>>50885558
>B-but anon, what about GWM?
Thanks for asking, Anon.

That gives you -5 to attack, or -2 because you're using sharpen blade (?). Buuuut you now don't have a +1 to Dex or Wis compared to other monks
So your average damage is now 33.375, not that much more
And your AC is only +1 compared to other monks

>>50885590
You admit that advantage = an increase in DPR then say the class that gets CONSTANT FUCKING ADVANTAGE (and can give it to LITERALLY THE ENTIRE PARTY ON EVERY ENEMY) is "not a damage dealer compared with others".

Are YOU retarded?

>>50885614
As a normal monk? sure, but there's no "normal" monk becuase everybody has a subclass, compare Kensai with OH, Shadow, SunSoul and LongLife (lets ignore wot4e because everybody knows they're shit).

>>50885614
>I think the deal is that sorcerers could use some more utility that doesn't clash with wizard. It'd be cool if they had at-will spells such as 'create water' that hopefully can't be abused too much.
i think wizards knows this and is adding that kind of thing to them. like storm sorc can make the whole party fly. is that useful at 18th level? idk. but its something. also controlling wind for free and stopping rain.
that said for my next next game i'd like to redesign sorc and warlock so here we are.

>>50885216
Kensai gives you a giant honking sword. This is a huge upgrade because your fist damage is complete ass for all levels of the game you're actually going to play, which is why every Monk is running around with a quarterstaff their entire lives. Now we've just taken this quarterstaff and turned it from 1d8 to 2d6, an improvement of two damage steps and the reliability that an extra die brings, plus the option to take feats like GWM (or PAM with more than a 1d8 weapon). Martial Arts never actually tops 1d10 and you're stuck doing 1d6 with all your non-staff hits as a regular Monk.

On top of this, Kensai gets a guaranteed pummel, which is 1d4 non-increasing. This can be applied to two different targets if your (Extra) Attack isn't striking the same guy, so 2d4 over the round. There's no Str/Dex bonus to this damage like there is with an unarmed bonus hit, but there's something to be said for not having to roll.

Any hope the non-Kensai had of keeping up with the Kensai's damage just completely falls to pieces if you extend the number crunching to level 11. +3 AB and damage on every hit for 10 rounds is RIDICULOUS.

A Kensai with greatsword, two attacks, and +4 Str is dealing an average of 24.5 (27 if dual pummeling).
Another Monk with quarterstaff, two attacks, and +4 Dex is dealing an average of 18.5 (22 if Flurrying)
If the Kensai wants to forego his second attack to get +2 AC, he loses that 11 damage greatsword hit, but gains a 5 damage punch. That takes him down to the same average as the staff Monk without Flurry.
There's also options for taking Tavern Brawler (but really, why would you bother) and however you want to torture GWM calculations to prove any fucking point.

What you SHOULD be doing instead of trying to argue that Kensai don't do way more damage is saying
>but Kensai have to take Strength which means their Dex/Wis suffers so their AC is less so they always have to take the +2 AC option if they want the same survivability as a normal Monk

>>50885644
Maybe I'm forgetting somethign but why Shadow monk gets constant advantage?

>>50885681
>Kensai gets a guaranteed pummel
Again with this shit...you need to hit with your weapon first, read the feature for the love of good, and is only 1d4 per target.

>>50885693
No they aren't

>>50885682
Their teleport gives them advantage on their first attack. But that's not "constant" because it's only one attack per round and you can't always have dim light at your position and your target.

What you CAN always have is Darkvision cast on yourself + other bruisers in the party and a fucking cloud of Darkness on the enemies. You really don't need to spend ki on anything else if the entire enemy squad is at disadvantaged at hitting, advantaged at getting hit.

>>50885681
>Kensai with 20 Str
Want to see your AC then

>>50885715
Even if you have darkvision you have disadvantage on magical Darkness, you aren't a warlock.

>>50885711
I'd just like to point out that this guy is actually agreeing with the guy he's arguing with.
>2+2=4
>nuh-uh, 2+2=4

>>50885296
>>50883612
Edited again:
...
-2 die size
* Reach
...


>>50883626
>>50883649
>>50883664
Edited:
...
Light Crossbow - 1d8 piercing - ammunition, two-handed, loading

Shortbow - 1d6 piercing - ammunition, two-handed

Sling removed
...
Whip - 1d4 slashing - finesse, reach
...
Glaive - 1d8 slashing - two-handed, finesse, reach
Longspear - 1d8 piercing - two-handed, finesse, reach
Longstaff - 1d8 bludgeoning - two-handed, finesse, reach

Halberd - 1d10 slashing - two-handed, heavy, reach
Pike - 1d10 piercing - two-handed, heavy, reach
Polehammer - 1d10 bludgeoning - two-handed, heavy, reach
...
Hand Crossbow - 1d4 piercing - ammunition, loading, light

Heavy Crossbow - 1d10 piercing - ammunition, two-handed, heavy, loading

Longbow - 2d4 piercing - ammunition, two-handed, heavy

>>50885757
Maybe it's because English is my 4th language, but guaranteed in my language means it's assured, that always happens...and that's false, if you don't hit an enemy with your kensai weapon you can't use pummel becuase you didn't hit.

Pummle is an extra damage on weapon that can be activated after your Attack Action similar to Smite.

>>50885746
>Darkvision the spell is just normal darkvision the racial
Well that's some shit
Whatever, just stand outside of the Darkness I guess.

>>50885781
No faggot pummel deals 1d4 as a bonus action you don't need to roll it's a unavoidable damage

>>50885781
You don't have to roll to land the pummel, only to land the attack that triggers pummel.
With an MA bonus attack you're rolling to land that one (but you don't have to roll the "triggering" attack).

Need some input on something. Looking to do a homebrew that takes place in a pre-industrial age-of-reason, but magic and monsters still exist in the shadows and behind closed doors.

For flavour, I'd like to remove the following as class options: bard, druid, ranger (spellcasting PHB default, non-spellcasting UA variants good), paladin and sorcerer. Also, magical subpaths, like arcane trickster and eldritch knight are restricted.


Clerics, warlocks and wizards still exist, as the secretive-behind-the-scenes mystics and occultists, but there's few magic options otherwise, as to hopefully capture the flavour of the setting.

Does this really objectively break or unbalance anything? Considering 5e "Basic D&D" only has Cleric, fighter, rogue, and wizard, I wouldn't think so.

Also, how does this sound as an idea to you, personally? Would you be unhappy to play in a game with limited options like this?

>>50885785
If you attack someone INSIDE the darkness you also get disadvantage.

So again, how does Shadowmonk get advantage to every attack ever?

>>50885734
I'm glad you took the advice at the end of the post, but you should have checked out the second paragraph where we're talking about +4 Str and Dex mods for our hypothetical fighters, not +5s.

>>50885809
So he just added guaranted for cinematic purposes to the phrase? that's misleading.

How do I know which printing my books are to check if they are updated with errata?

MM Errata says that if the books is 3rd printing or later, the text have been edited accordingly.

I can't see it in the book though.

>>50885836
"I can guarantee you a 2% rate on this loan" does not mean you are going to get the loan, only that your rate will be 2% if you DO get the loan.

>>50885827
>My monk has GWM and +4 to Str
I still want to see your AC

Also pretty sure that if you have GWM the other monk is going to have +5 to Dex

>>50885855
Anon, you can't just make counterarguments to things no one argued in the first place. Why do you insist that everyone can roll perfect 18s at creation like you? That's unreasonable.

>>50885854
>Kensai gets a guaranteed pummel
>But when I say guaranteed I don't mean guaranteed

>>50885840
Should be somewhere on the Credits page (page 2).

>>50885888
I'm at a loss as to how to teach someone who's EFL things like context and relativity.

>>50885882
Is this a joke? you're giving an ASI and the same Str as the other monk has Dex

Lets assume something realistical, Elite Array

If you have GWM and 18 on Str I'm pretty fucking sure the other monk has 20 on Dex and better AC than you.

But yeah, your example in where the non kensai monk rolled worse than the kensai one proves the kensai is better.

>>50885919
that's what I thought but it doesn't say printing 2 or 3 or whatever.

It says "This printing includes corrections to the first printing" but I don't know if they only made changes once.

>>50885937
Just because he doesn't have English as first language doesn't mean you can pull words out of your ass to serve your narrative, you pummel is as "guaranteed" as FoB ;^)

>>50885942
I'm disappointed, Anon. It took you only one post to shift from "you said the Kensai had +5 Str" to "you said the Kensai had GWM". I'd hoped you'd realize the second mistake just as quickly.

>>50885970
>have to land bonus punch
>don't have to land pummel
Somehow everyone else knew what was meant. Don't be wilfully dense, now.

Can this thread die already?

>>50886006
It would die faster if a Kensai were attacking it instead of an Open Palm Monk.

>>50886006
I'll make a fresh one once we hit page 6 if someone else doesn't.

>>50885997
You still have to land your weapon attack, and if you're using the +AC property of Kensai weapons that means you only have one chance (because the unarmed attack takes your other attack if you're 5+ level). Statistically speaking FoB has more chances to hit at least once than you dealing damage with Pummel.

>>50886015
Kek

>>50886015
I spend 3 ki and use an action, now CON save and see if this thread dies for sure.

>>50885816
figured it out
>darkvision yourself if you don't have it already
>darkness over the light source(s)
>enemy is just in regular non-magic darkness now so you can see through it and beat them up

>>50886063
now don't you dare fucking lie and say the DC is higher than 15

>>50886063

>>50886087
If I'm a 17th level, and I have to to use quivering palm, the DC has to be around 8+6+Wis, and I'm hoping my Wis is more than 13

Rolled 5 + 3 (1d20 + 3)

>>50886063

>>50880770

>>50886110
Fuuuuuuu

>>50885516
We should be encouraging more people into the hobby you knobgobbler.

>>50885810
If the players are down for this kind of thing, then obviously it's fine. But if Johnny's fantasy was playing a high fantasy wizard, then you're both shit outta luck.

The main problem with this will be that there's a huge lack of healing power, though it will be remedied by the fact that the setting could probably allow for more widespread healing potions and such.

Rolled 6 + 10 (1d20 + 10)

>>50886110
nigga if he's 17 and the thread is over 300 posts then you've got a proficiency of at least +6
you're not playing some kinda shitty non-Con class are you?

New Thread:
>>50886102

>>50885534
I'm playing a wizard and there's a sorcerer in my party. I'd say in general I'm being more useful than him, but not by a huge margin, because the DM keeps me in check - there's hardly any spells lying around for me to copy, I have only found 3 in our entire 10 levels.
It isn't as exciting as it could be, but it's for the best, since I realise how a few extra rituals would make some rough situations go way smoother.

tl;dr: the DM not feeding spells for your book goes a long way to balance stuff

>>50886140
>page 5
NO

Rolled 12 + 10 (1d20 + 10)

>>50886133
I'm using Indomitable

>>50886133
I read that as over 300 pounds.

>>50886149
He failed against Quivering Palm.

>>50886149
too bad.

>>50886140
>>50886158
IDIOT
QUIVERING PALM IS A TWO ROUND ACTION AND WE SAVED >>50886150