/5eg/ D&D Fifth Edition General

I didn't think I'd be able to hate any UA material more than the stupid fucking feats

Lore Wizard proved me wrong

File: Annatar.jpg (166KB, 1024x1200px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1024x1200px

>>51786979
In your honest opinion, what's the BEST build for an archer? It's just a thought experiment, so feel free to do wild shit like UA multiclassing.

>>51786979
>What are your thoughts on the new UA?

Lore wizards have definitely made me rethink allowing UA.

Anybody have some sort of collection of all the maps that have been posted or any collection of maps at all?
I'm looking for some good dungeon ones that I could get a design feel for.

>>51787015
arcane trickster rogue with a two-level dip into fighter

Assuming by "archer" you mean "crossbowman"

>>51787015
Bow: Eldritch Knight
Crossbow: Arcane Trickster

>>51787033
Archer meaning archer, no cheating anon

>>51787015
3 Arcane Archer with Bursting and Seeking arrows. 17 Assassin if you want damage, or Skirmisher if you want utility.

>>51786979
The look like rushed up ideas that needs a lot of tinkering. I hope it gets better after feedback.

>>51786979
>mace, flail, morningstar, warpick
>a d6 with no traits and three d8's with no traits
What would be a good common trait to place on these to make them more interesting to use mechanically?

Reposting from the previous thread...
>Whenever a character would roll 1d20, they instead roll 3d20 and take the middle result
>When a character has advantage they instead take the highest of 3d20, or the lowest of 3d20 if they have disadvantage
>Weapon attacks inflict a critical hit on a natural 18+, or a natural 16+ for Champion Fighters

There would certainly need to be a little rebalancing for a few options but generally speaking I think this would work quite well. What are your thoughts and suggestions, aside from "Don't do it you fool!"

>>51787108
Is there a particular need or benefit from making advantage crazy go nuts and disadvantage "don't even bother?"

>>51787100
>>51787015
Actually looking at it a bit more, I'm entirely wrong. 3 Dark Stalker(Revised Ranger) and 17 Ass/Scout(don't know why I said skirmisher).

>>51787106
Something that causes the creature hit to become stunned, such as on a critical or if you have advantage on an attack and you would hit with both rolls.

>>51787126
You mean deep stalker, right?

>>51787152
I'm really batting a thousand today huh? Yeah, Deep Stalker. Close enough.

File: Weapons Reworked.png (55KB, 997x887px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 997x887px

>>51787106
I reworked the weapons a bit, posted it like a hundred threads ago. Try this.

anyone check out the 5e warden on the DM guild? is it any good? or perhaps would it be better represented just being a druid archetype?

File: randysavage.jpg (33KB, 288x361px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 288x361px

>>51787155
As long as you keep on truckin' and fixin' your mistakes, you're gonna be a-okay.

>>51787168
i posted a d10 2 handed spear and a d12 club that is essentially a kanabo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanab%C5%8D

what ya think of those?

In 2e wizards couldn't wear armor at all while casting spells. So what's stopping 5e wizards from taking feats to throw fireballs in full plate?

>>51787108
My group uses 3d6 instead of 1d20. Advantage is 5d6 drop lowest two, disadvantage is 5d6 drop highest two. Crit on 17+ naturally. We also did maximum damage dice explosion rules.

That makes some balance alterations. Crits are less common but regular competence is up because most of the time you're hitting between 8-13 on most checks. Class/race options that increase crit chance are exponentially more powerful because it goes from a roughly 1.9% to 4.7% (I think?), regardless of math accuracy it is certainly noticeable.

With dice explosion rolling max damage can be pretty intense, and with the options such as the half-orc where they already roll bonus dice on a crit is hilarious because you can end up rolling obscene amounts of damage with some luck, but it isn't common enough to be game breaking. It certainly makes using things like greataxes (which roll 12 more often than 2d6 does) or whips and daggers (which have a 25% of explosion).

>>51787203
nothing
but you're better off taking a one level dip in stone sorcerer to get an ac calculation of 13+con

>>51787203
Nothing, mages in armor is part of 5E. The only reason most don't is because most, for fluff reasons, don't spend a lot of time learning to wear it effectively.

>>51787219
>stone sorc
>get shield
>start with AC 15+Dex as a full caster
>human+warcaster
>get whatever 1H weapon you think is the bassest-assed
>pick spells that let you reposition allies and enemies or do area control
>spam attack cantrips
I fucking love the stonesorc.

>>51787254
Stone sorcerer's ac is CON-based, not DEX-based
Which makes it meme supreme for casters

File: 1487217080996.jpg (127KB, 564x705px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 564x705px

Didn't see the thread had moved on

>>Party is traveling with a princess NPC
>>Actual useful princess mind you, she is very smart and gives the party a nice intelligence boost.
>>She is also a necromancer
>>They have not found out.
>>They have accepted her as part of the group, one of them is in love with her (ingame obviously)
>>She has been critically wounded and lost an arm now in a coma state
>>The party is now fighting tooth and nail to bring the Princess back to her kingdom to get her healed.
>>On the edge of her kingdom, a man approaches and tells the party that he is a prince and that SHE is his fiancee and that the party is under arrest
>>The prince is a fucking asshole
>>Top notch cunt, calls the Princess a ugly waste of time now she lost her arm etc
>>One of the party has already tried to ssault him
>>My party is now SERIOUSLY considering murdering this prince just because he is a dick
>I've got a lot of material to work with now and I'm a fairly new DM
>What are some interesting routes I can take with this

>>51787254
if you are using Stone's Durability, you do NOT get to add dex.

>>51787274
>Stone sorcerer's ac is CON-based
How did I not notice that
MY AC IS EVEN HIGHER THAN I THOUGHT
MY DICK IS NOW EVEN HARDER THAN THE REST OF ME

>>51787124
On average 3d20 take highest is almost exactly equivalent to a +5 modifier, whereas 2d20 take highest (traditional Advantage) is about a +3.3 modifier. If you'd succeed 50% of the time with a standard roll, you succeed about 66.5% of the time with standard advantage and about 75% of the time with my recommended advantage. It's not a huge adjustment at all really.

The major change is rolling 3d20 take average for standard rolls. This makes smaller modifiers a little more useful. A character with 16 Str is going to have somewhat better odds at arm-wrestling a Str 10 opponent in 3d20 take mid as opposed to 1d20. It also makes extremely high and low DCs harder to achieve normally. This would be a problem in 3E D&D but much less so in 5E where bounded accuracy is prevalent and DCs only really range up into the 25s and 30s.

I think it's definitely worth trying out. I'm going to experiment with it a bit in my own campaign and see how the players like it. Feel free to give it a shot in your own games as well.

>>51787214
I used to like the 3d6 curve BUT I don't like how it reduces the range from 1-20 to 3-18. It also bunches up the results in the 8-13 range, whereas I prefer them to be bunched up in the 6-15 range. A little more variance feels better IMO.

>>51787313
I like the 8-13 spread being most common, but different strokes for different folks.

>>51787312
15+CON = 20 at best.

>>51787281
The prince is also a paladin who knows her evil necromancer plan and wants to stop her without having to actually fight the party, which frustrates him to the point of being an ass?

Tell us more about the princess. What are your general plans for the character?

>>51787331
My character has higher Con than Dex right now, so that works for me.

Magic shield and armor boosting items can come later if I need them.

>>51787331
20 AC is pretty kino, pal
Magic items, of course, can boost that further up. As can somehow getting Shield of Faith cast on you.
Maybe stone sorcerer is meme supreme dip for a paladin?

>>51787354
Or maybe they're just a great duo.

Is this invocation balanced?

Joined Spirit
prereq: Pact of the Chain, 5th level
Your familiar can now take the Attack action, without you expending an attack, however if a source of damage reduces the familiar to 0 hit points, you take any excess damage.

I want to make the mechanics express the concept of one being in two bodies. It might also be appropriate to limit it to GOO pact, as that's more matched with mental malarkey.

>>51787325
Well, for me it's the fact that 5E uses integers of 5 for its ability check DCs so I feel like a little more variance is a good thing. The AGE system uses 3d6 + stat but its DCs are in integers of 2, so the reduced variance fits like a glove. AGE could actually stand to have its DCs in multiples of 3 now that I think about it, would probably function a little better.

3d6 is a fine dice setup though, if you enjoy it more power to you.

>>51787384
I usually ignore RAW DCs from NPC effects anyway and base it on how likely I want the PC's to be able to resist it, so that probably makes this work more fluidly.

>>51786979
I think a good way to "fix" how incredibly broken lore wizards are, is to have the ability to retool spells, but only during rests, and making it obligatory to prepare the spell variations and experimental spells.

Damage type = Spell variation
Saving throw = Experimental spell

So for spell variations:
You can prepare the original + 1 variation OR 2 variations per preparation slot
You can make wizard level / 2 variations per long rest, or sacrifice arcane recovery equal to spell level to make a new variation of that spell (only once per short rest)

And for experimental spells:
Requires a preparation slot of its own
Can be cast only once per day
You can make one experimental spell during a long rest

I'm playing a Lore Wizard soon, does this sound reasonable yet?

I'm thinking of making similar things for Alchemical casting, so the alchemical spells become their own spell to cast (similar to experimental spells, except they're higher level spells entirely).

I can see the space running out in the spell sheet though.

>>51787419
>Can be cast only once per day
once per long rest* obviously.

>>51787332
>Tell us more about the princess. What are your general plans for the character?

Well, the end game plan was for her to be the BBEG
But the party would be given the choice of joining her

She's a necromancer, everything the party has fought, she has raised back up in secret and will use that as her army in the end.
Her goal is to overthrow her father the king and use her power to finally end the war with their rival kingdom without having to sacrifice any of her subjects in pointless war
The asshole prince is naturally from the rival kingdom
The old king wants the necromancer Princess and asshole prince to marry so a peace can be found even if temporary.

At the end, she reveals her necromancer ways, and asks the party to join her in making a better world
If they refuse, she can't bring herself to harm her best friends, and she'll throw down her weapons
>I know my party, they are going to be conflicted as FUCK, and will most likely join her.

>>51787447
Souns like you've got everything pretty well sorted

Is she actually unconscious at this time, or just faking in order to do her bad juju subconsciously?

>>51787447
>Everything they fought, she raised back up in secret
How exactly is she doing that? DM fiat special magic that lets her raise undead with permanent control over them?

>>51787447
>and she'll throw down her weapons
Why? Even if she refuses to fight them, would she give up all that she worked for because of that? She could simply just look disappointed, give some sad goodbye line and walk away.

Unless they stop and attack her, of course.

>>51787478
Yeah she is actually under

>>51787494
Yeah, I've given her a bullshit necro-spell
Pretty much just a ritual she does and makes them into mindless husks That she can always control
Balance wise it's impossible and I realise that, any players that go necromancer would probably be foaming at the teeth reading that.

>>51787532
This sounds better.

>>51787447
>she'll throw down her weapons
Right here is about where you need the dark powers that she learned from/stole from/pacted with for her forbidden magic to step in and assume direct control of the situation, either by possessing her or physically manifesting. There must always be an epic fight.

Remember kids, don't mess with necromancy, especially when it deals with mysteriously powerful spells that are leagues stronger than other necromancy spells

File: 32ac3ef78bd0c3cdcbac40ee358ead7c.jpg (44KB, 564x900px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 564x900px

How viable is the warlock class?

>>51787683
Plenty, you just have to be careful with spell choices. Generally, your focus is going to be blasting and social engagements.

As usual, not nearly as much utility as the wizard.

>>51787168
>pike loses 2 handed
thank god, the stupidest thing in dnd is that historic spear+shield formations simply don't work. it's absolutely bonkers to me that i can't simply have a shield and a reach weapon with piercing. i don't even care if the damage is low, i just want to feel grecco-roman

>>51787331
>shield spell

How often do you actually roll against players? I have discovered that I hate doing it as a DM and hate it as a player. I would rather set difficulty dcs in almost every situation in order to create a better narrative, but I'm curious to what you guys think.

Obv you have to roll for things like attacking and grapple checks, but I mean things like insight to tell if the NPC is lying. Or a persuasion check with a rational argument with someone.

>>51787015
Do crossbows count? If so, I would say variant human crossbow expert revised ranger.

>>51787567
>>51787532
>Even if she refuses to fight them, would she give up all that she worked for because of that? She could simply just look disappointed, give some sad goodbye line and walk away.
Or, in the event the players want to fight her, she could imprison them

>>51787859
You mean the player rolls insight versus the NPC's passive deception and stuff like this? It works, surely, though because of d20 variation having contested checks would mean that a PC could succeed even on a low roll, and on top of that the DC would always change so they wouldn't know if they succeeded or not. Would you also be against rolling stealth?

File: 1486938370891.jpg (35KB, 640x628px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 640x628px

>>51787859
I've never done that, I've always gone by DC
At least you can fudge a DC

What I really hate:
"Roll for X"
>"Wait DM I have high X skill/profession I WANT TO ROLL TOO!"

mystic when

>>51788023
eventually

>>51787281
PC with crush NEEDS to marry his qt one-armed waifu ASAP

What are the most essential spells for a warlock to grab asides from eldritch blast and hex?

>>51788169
What pact, patron, play-style and sort of campaign?

>>51787168
>>51787733

Should there be some drawback to being able to use a pike one-handed with a shield?
Also were warhammers and battleaxes typically flung at people back in the day?

How's this for a 3rd level build:

>Variant human with Crossbow Master.
>Folk hero background.
>Rogue with Scout variant.

Are there rules for sticking a bayonet on my crossbow? If not I was thinking of handling it as a versatile dagger.

This is a strange question, but how much should you let your players know about the game beforehand? I'm running a module.

Obviously, they need connection to the plot, so session zero stuff is a must. But how much is too much?

>>51788290
frankly i think there needs to be a spear/pike that's d6 one handed reach piercing d8 versatile. i think for balance reasons it needs to have lower damage than a long sword, but maybe a heavy version w the same damage would be good too

>>51788380
which module?

>>51788432
Storm King's Thunder is what I want to run.

>>51788380
i lie to my players sometimes about what we're going to play, i've thought about telling them they're playing a classic noble fantasy adventure and after 1 or 2 sessions chucking them into COS

>>51788380
Just tell them your going to run X module.

If they want to ruin the experience for themselves by reading ahead, that's on them. If they want to ruin the experience for everyone else by fucking with the campaign or dropping spoilers, you kick the player out of your group and move on.

File: 62254041.jpg (94KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 400x400px

>>51788454
As a DM I can see why someone would do that, but honestly it just feels like unnecessarily fucking with the players.
>be ranger, DM says they're playing classic fantasy adventure
>choose monstrosity or whatever as favored enemy
>thrown into CoS, can't swap for undead
>hfw

I got this idea, obviously inspired by resident evil 7 plus some other horror games:
>PC's wake up at midnight in a big hotel run by hags on the tip of an island closely connected to the feywild
>all the PC's have for armor are normal clothing, some knives for weapons, and 1 candle for light.
>They can still use their spells and natural abilities
>Hallways are patrolled by a flesh golem and some homonculi
>Rooms contain practical loot or weird puzzles but the name of the chambers are misleading
>3 different ways to escape the hotel
I'm new to D&D and I was thinking this might make a cool opening session for level 1 PCs. But I'm thinking it might make more sense to run some conventional dungeon crawls first just to get used to the system.
One way the Hag-Hotel experience could go wrong is if a player makes a character with darkvision then they can abandon the other characters with the candle. Second way is that monks and rogues won't be bothered by the lack of armament.
Could a level one spellcaster one-shot a flesh golem? That's the third way.

how to become dm?

On a scale of 1-meme how retarded is making a build built around using Fabricate in clever ways like some kind of really slow solid matter Green Lantern?

>>51788649
Just go illusion wizard,

>>51787683
>How viable is the warlock class?
it's my favorite class, best thing they did this edition

>>51788621
I like this idea, but you may want to save it for a second campaign

If you and your players are new, I'd do a one-shot or a short campaign of your typical dungeon raid and goblin killing. That way you've figured out the system and can run the more fun campaigns better.

>>51787020
You should count the number of 1st, 2nd, and 3rd level slots a wizard will ever have.

Let them burn through all their slots and have to suffer through 5-7 others through an adventuring day.

>>51788621
Nope, casters couldn't one shot a Fles Golem, and a Flesh Golem would easily slaughter multiple parties of unprepared level ones, especially if they have no tactical advantages or even good weapons.

Make it magical darkness or something if darkvision bothers you. Or put in illusions that are dispelled by candle light (a personal favorite).

I see why Monks and Rogues might be a problem, but when casters will still be able to cast, martials need some stuff.

>>51787203
Because it's a waste of feats when you could just cast Mage Armor

>>51787015
Arcane Trickster if you're using crossbows, gets the most damage out of a single shot.
If you're using bows, then fighter. Eldritch Knight and Battlemaster are both good options.

>>51787203
A single level of something that gains armor proficiency would be more efficient than passing up all your ability score improvements and waiting until level 8/16 for the Heavily Armored feat

>>51788621
>>51788787
Also keep in mind that as a DM you can always adjust the CR of the creatures to match your players' level. There's no law that says your level 1 PC's can't fight a dragon, it just takes some adjusting. A level 15 party could even face uber-kobolds.

>>51788621
I think you're overshooting here, especially if the players are inexperienced. The party waking up somewhere with no equipment and having to survive through wits is a cool and usual idea, but you might be in for disappointment in some of your ideas. For instance only 3 out of the 9 races in the PHB don't have darkvision, so chances are that some of the PCs will have it. Most importantly, though:
>Could a level one spellcaster one-shot a flesh golem?
No way in hell. However, a flesh golem WILL oneshot a 1st level character per hit. And it can make 2 attacks with his action, so that's 2 PCs down, or even worse, outright KILLED because of massive damage. To top it off, any martial character will be simply useless against the golem, unless you're planning on dropping some magical or adamantine weapons.

tl, dr: DO NOT use a flesh golem. If you do, prepare for a TPK.

>>51788869
Could you elaborate a bit on how arcane trickster gets the most damage out of a single shot?

File: an_unfettered_soul_the_wizard_by_jaasif-d79bzgh.jpg (73KB, 726x939px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 726x939px

Is skilled a good feat for a first level warlock? I have combat covered with eldritch blast, I've got exploration covered with my pact magic, but I feel like warlocks are lacking in the skill department. I was thinking about picking up Arcana, History, Investigation, Stealth, Insight, Perception, Deception, and Persuasion so I can cover my utility bases.

>>51788787
>Make it magical darkness or something if darkvision bothers you. Or put in illusions that are dispelled by candle light (a personal favorite).

I'm stealing that. Thanks for inspiration anon.

Funny enough, I thought of using gray trip wires that fuck with darkvision but cast a noticeable shadow with light, but that never occurred to me.

>>51788351
>>51788351

Anyone?

>>51788380
>>51788380
I would tell as much as possible, mainly about the setting and genre. Offering plot hooks might be good idea as well. ("It would be cool to have noble from Waterdeep. There will be dealing with demons. Oh, and its mostly in city, so you might want to reconsider that druid.")

>>51788908
If you want a skill monkey with some casting, why not play a Bard?

>>51787015
Here are your options:

Fighter with CBE + SS
UA Hunter Ranger
Rogue with CBE
Fighter Sorcerer-Warlock with Agonizing Repelling Blast


Fighter sorcererwarlock is probably the strongest in my opinion but isn't technically archery, is a little bit bullshit and your DM might stop you but has the crazy utility of crazy pushback.
Fighter with feats is superb against low AC targets with sharpshooter. Otherwise their gimmick is just they shoot. A lot.
UA Ranger is great for AoE. They could also take up SS at some point, I guess. Maybe CBE.
The rogue is probably not the strongest, but pretty flexible with good skills and all that. I'd probably say it's the most fun.

>>51788935
There are no rules for doing that. What you suggest is reasonable if it can't be put on hand crossbows and it requires martial weapon proficiency, since you're getting the benefit of holding two weapons at once.

>>51788960
Because vicious mockery does shit damage and I want to play a warlock. Next question?

>>51788625
>>51788625
Read the Player's Handbook (PHB), the Dungeon Master's Guide (DMG)

then go to local nerd hangout, put up flyers. Or acquire group of friends who are interested in RP. Or look on the Roll20 forums (never used it myself)

File: 200px-Bone_Arbalist.png (43KB, 200x205px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 200x205px

>>51788969
We're talking about a heavy crossbow, of course.

My reasoning is that since the Crossbow Master feat already allows to use the crossbow at close quarters, it might very well be a bayonet, right?

>>51788908
Might as well be a half-elf instead.

You get +1 skill over variant human, +1 language and +1 cha, +1 to another stat, in comparison, along with fey ancestry and darkvision.

>>51788979
>I want good cantrips
Then go sorlock, not warlock, and focus charisma.

>>51789013
It's just a flavor thing, right? Like you're not trying to pull off some shenanigans with Sentinel or Great Weapon Master, are you?

>>51788625
Have you ever played before? What seems to be a problem?

>>51788908
Spell Sniper (240 ft cover ignoring EBs is pretty cool) or War Caster (advantage on concentration and AoO EBs are both good).

Alternatively, you could get Actor. +1 Cha and it synergizes great with Mask of Many Faces if you end up picking that up.

>>51788751
>>51788787
>>51788885
>>51788886

Thanks for the feedback, yeah, I will do the conventional dungeons first and then when I get the hang of it I'll try hag-hotel

As for the flesh-golem, I was thinking it would serve the purpose of being an overpowered monster that the player characters can only run and hide from.

>>51788351
Considering you're basically downgrading yourself (unless there's something I don't know about scout)... Yeah, sure.

I mean, crossbow expert makes it so there's never any reason to use anything but your regular crossbow attack.

I'd allow you to refluff 'crossbow expert' to have some sort of bayonet-like attack in close quarters that's identical to the normal crossbow expert attacks.

>>51789015
>>I want good cantrips
>Then go sorlock, not warlock, and focus charisma.

And you don't need the best cantrips when you have access to all your spell slots for a whole day at once.

>>51788951
This. If agree to run a game for someone it means I already trust them to not be an asshole and I'm confident they'll use any information I give them to the benefit of the game and everyone playing.

>>51789027
I honestly have no idea what either of those do mate. But I'll check it out right away

I just want a fun Scout who can run around in combat. Crossbows are just cooler than regular bows.

>>51786979
Lore Wizards made me ignore that fucking Raven Queen pact.
This UA was so full of shit that it is almost wonderful.

Anyway, The New invocations were really nice.

>>51788388
A partisan, maybe?

>>51789123
But the Raven Queen pact was okay and Lore wizard is retardedly overpowered garbage.

Making a revised ranger for SKT, which enemy type pops up the most from this list: beasts, fey, humanoids, monstrosities, or undead?

File: 54390004_B_big.jpg (20KB, 800x500px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 800x500px

How would you guys stat a sabre?

How about a falchion?

>>51789156
But is it stronger than Divination?

Is there any more info on Goliaths besides what's in SCAG/Volo's? Would older edition fluff still be valid for them?

>>51789165
>sabre
Like one of the other 1 handed swords available

>falchion
like a greatsword, maybe a greataxe if feeling frisky

>>51789165
Rapier/shortsword and longsword.

>>51789165
Sabre=Scimitar or rapier
Falchion=Longsword/battleaxe

>>51789177
Depends on how long your average adventuring day lasts, but I'd say so. The only thing competing for the title is Portant and honestly I prefer the more reliable damage output Spell Secrets gives you. I can essentially just get the most damaging spell and not worry about resistances and then just focus on pure utility beyond that.

Warlock stuff in the UA is great. Wizard is meh, but I don't think its so OP, not as OP as Theurge and not much better than divination. I dont know why some people are so pissed

>>51789177
>But is it stronger than Divination?
Let's see...
Divination
>change a d20 roll 2-3/day
>until you take a short rest you can gain darkvision, or see ethereal or read any language or see invisibility 10ft
or
Lore
>Get to change damage types at will
>change save stat once/short rest
>add 2d10 force damage or be able to target a mile away or increase save dc by 2
>swap spells 1/short rest
>cast any spell from any list 1/day

File: Griffith.png (498KB, 705x577px) Image search: [Google]

498KB, 705x577px

>>51789165
A saber would be a longsword, maybe a rapier if you want to Griffith it up.

A falchion would be either a scimitar, a longsword, or a greatsword depending (obviously) on size.

File: Loremaster fixing.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>51787419
Here's a PDF version of the fixes (Very different than my quoted original post).

Do note any fixes it could use.

The main points are to reduce the spontaneous nature of the spell variations, because what the fuck that's Sorcerer shit. Also the saving throw thing was moved to the 6th level feature, it's way too powerful at 2nd level, but this time it's permanent (but requires a 3rd level spell slot).

I'm running this through my GM (because this is kind of a nerf) even though he never said I couldn't take the broken Loremaster, I just felt the fluff was too Sorcerer-y for a Wizard archetype.

And yes, it does disturb me that Loremasters are called Savants, which was what I called my Sorcerer variant class I made a few weeks before this UA came out.

>>51789177
Yes, by a significant margin.

>>51789278
>>add 2d10 force damage or be able to target a mile away or increase save dc by 2
this is not that bad, it costs spell slots. Only at very high levels it can be an issue. I would just change the "mile away" to "double or triple spell range"

My fucking DM keeps flaking. All week he tells us how he's 100% ready, everything is gonna be great guys! Then game day shows up, and he texts us, "oh no DnD today guys, we're gonna play something else instead." Sure, the other games he has are fun, but goddamnit I joined the group to play fucking DnD, not goddamn Sentinels of the Multiverse.

>>51789180
They were invented for Races of Stone in 3.5, which includes a detailed goliath ecology and day-in-the-life story. 4e's Player's Handbook 2 also has stuff on them.

>>51789325
>2d10 force damage
>Magic Missile
>Level 2
Ehhhhh its kinda strong

File: devil Bearded.jpg (63KB, 736x752px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 736x752px

>describing pic related to party
>humanoid-ish, purple skin, tentacle-like appendages coming out of their chins
>they all think it's Mind Flayers
That was some funny shit, but I really should get better at descriptions.

>>51789325
the 2d10 costs a first level slot, and can be combined with AOE's like fireball or, heck, combine it with magic missile for 2d10+1d4+1 per target. You can wreck some serious shit with that.

>>51789359
You don't get Alchemical Casting until level 6

>>51789359
OH MY GOD. Getting nuclear with 2d10+1d4+1x3 at 6th level. And that's two first level spell slots. If you cast it with a 3rd and a 1st, it's x5, and shit gets more awful from there.

My party just fingerblasted that day's boss in 1 round because they ambushed him with a hold monster with a dc 20 ....

>>51789165
In my game sabers are equivalent to scimitars and falchions are equivalent to longswords.

>>51789285
You can't really fix lore wizard without completely overhauling it or gutting it. The features are just way too strong to exist together in the same archetype.

They should've built it around the "burning spell slots to buff your spells" concept alone. That at least has a cost/benefit to it which puts it closer to the same level as other traditions.

>>51789396
My mistake!
Its still pretty strong though...

>>51789165

Sabre: 1d8 slashing, finesse
Falchion: 2d6 slashing, heavy, two-handed

File: pic1677411.jpg (184KB, 456x610px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 456x610px

>>51789015
Are you thick? I want to play a warlock and I figured that skilled would give me a well rounded use outside of combat.

>>51789034
I want to be able to do things outside of combat too, and it feels like Actor would turn into a one trick pony.

>>51789426
>DC 20 save
.. What?
Is this a proficiency bonus +5 stat bonus +5 lore wizard using their +2 to DC or something?

Or is DC 20 their passive perception?

>>51788785

>You should count the number of 1st, 2nd, and 3rd level slots a wizard will ever have.

"Way, way more than enough?" Yeah, I'm aware.

>5-7 others (encounters I'm assuming)

Or instead of punishing myself and all the other players I could just disallow the broken as shit nonsense.

>>51789468
No problem, and yeah it's still pretty strong at that level.

>>51789359
Well it's sixth level actually, but that still means you can cast a 3rd level magic missile and burn a 1st level spell slot for 5d4 + 10d10 + 5 (average 72.5).

>>51789532
Well, at least the damage needs to be divided between multiple targets, but it's still pretty iffy.

File: Berserker_Armour_Version_2.png (581KB, 800x1206px) Image search: [Google]

581KB, 800x1206px

Is giving non-magical party members magical items à la Berserk an acceptable way to balance out spellcasters?

What kind of tricks would a not very bright ex-farmgirl with a little beast killing experience (Maybe a starving lone wolf or two among some other things that might cause trouble for small villages.) have for fighting things other than "Hit it hard until it stops moving"? I'm looking for something to bring some more flavor to playing her.

>>51789485
You'd get the same effect but pretty much better if you went half-elf instead of variant human and got the skills at level 4 instead.

>>51789557

it's sort of expected, mang.

>>51789557
You'd be a real cunt if you didn't.

>>51789557
I don't quite get what the meaning is, but if it's 'give the martials magic items, but not the spellcasters' then it kinda fucks over inexperienced magic users.

The deal with casters is that casters have much higher skill caps, but a caster who isn't sure what they're doing is probably just as good as a martial.

>>51789561

Have you tried seasonings and sauces?

>>51789549
Reread Magic Missle man. "and you can direct them to hit one creature or several."

>>51789549
No? Magic Missile can target a single creature. Isn't the whole point of nuclear druid and the like was that you only rolled once for all the darts, but each dart counted as a separate instance of damage?

>>51789561
Traps and ambushes?

> I'm looking for something to bring some more flavor to playing her.
Roleplaying, if possible, always works.

File: Capture.png (352KB, 1081x606px) Image search: [Google]

352KB, 1081x606px

I notice that Suggestion doesn't have the "the target knows they were charmed" caveat. Is this a typo or intended?

Does that mean if I don't make someone do something they'd realize isn't normal, such as the example Suggestion "You might suggest that a knight give her warhorse to the first beggar she meets", but do something reasonable like "Asking a merchant nicely for better prices", would they know they were charmed?

>>51789485
Well it depends on the campaign, but being able to very effectively pass yourself off as a different person is generally pretty useful.

But if you just want to be a skill monkey, play a bard or rogue. If you just want a lot of skills, then you might as well play half-elf. Sure you could take Skilled and try to be a skill monkey, but you're only going to be particularly useful with Cha skills. Pretty much everything else will probably be done better my someone else with the proper ability scores.

If your worried that much about utility, then go tomelock so you can have cantrips and rituals out the ass.

Say I'm a druid surrounded by 3 enemies. Then I turn into a Large or Huge creature. Do the enemies get pushed out of my space?

>>51789646
I don't think it's typo, but rather very much intended. It has some limitations, namely the fact, you still need to pronounce incantations, which might weird target or bystanders.

>>51789646
>The suggestion must be worded in such a manner
as to make the course of action sound reasonable.

It's basically like a persuasion check, but with a save instead of an actual check.

>>51789489
He's level 12 bard with level 5 fighter, super competitative kinda a that guy, just looking through his sheet theres a +2 on his Spell save I can't figure out where he got it from.

>>51789721
No magic items or anything?

How good is the swashbuckler rogue really?

>>51787214
Wait, if you rolled 2d6, wouldn't you explode a die that rolled a 6? If so, that's actually a bigger boost to the 2d6 than it is to the 1d12. With exploding dice the average result of a d12 goes from 6.5 to a hair over 7; 2d6 goes from 7 to 8.16.

(Also, even if you can only explode on a 12 with 2d6, it still comes out slightly ahead at roughly 7.2.)

>>51789749
Its the best one of the bunch. Sneak attacks 90% of the time, increases to initiative, best part of the mobile feat for free. Its pretty great!

>>51789600
I was already considering that outside of combat she'd be a half decent cook but since you mention it, maybe if there were something suitable she could weaponize seasonings, cause some kind of irritation to her opponents.
>>51789645
I've considered traps but I'm not sure what kind she might be familiar with. I've already thought of some interests for her to engage in outside of combat for roleplaying but I'm not really sure how someone from her background might approach a fight.

>>51789721
>He could have had level 9 spells but he took 5 levels of fighter instead
But why?

Unless they have some sort of bonus, if they have 20 charisma and total level 17 they should have a save DC of 19.

He sounds like a 'that guy' who doesn't 100% understand their role in the party and just wants to be the best when they'd be honestly better by being a full bard.

>>51789721
Is that a multiclass you're describing? Like 7 Bard/5 Fighter, or is he a 12 Bard with another character that he plays with that's a level 5 Fighter in a different game?

>>51789362
I just change the description of bearded devils so that they look like hideous insectoid monsters with iron tendrils extending from their face and long, extendable limbs. Makes the term "bearded devil" more of an understatement than a descriptor.

>>51789749
It's a great choice for people who aren't sure how to metagame rogue.

Otherwise, it's 2nd best, or situationally 3rd or 4th best.

AT is the easily the best choice if you know what you're doing.

I'm about to start playing a wizard for the first time, I like the idea of a caster with a spell for every situation, in and out of combat. I'm level 1 but I'm probably gonna do Illusion or Divination when the time comes.

My concern is learning new spells. How difficult is it, typically, for wizards to get a hold of new spells? I know you can copy them from scrolls, but my DM is new to DMing so I'm worried I'll have to constantly remind him to drop scrolls as loot. Are there other ways to get spells/scrolls?

Cantrip suggestions are also appreciated, I'm leaning towards Fire Bolt, Minor Illusion, and Prestidigitation.

>>51789721
If they're level 12 and especially if they're level 17, boss type enemies should start having legendary actions, including legendary resistance.

>Player (druid) is starting with a magical Owl
>It can talk and everything
>Pretty powerful
>Will also serve as a good way for me to contact the party as gods etc
>In return I've made her swear never to take up mortal arms against the creatures of the forest

Is this fair or am starting to be "THAT" DM?

>>51789746
He's got some homemade 2 handed sword
>>51789795
I've got no idea what he's playing at, he doesn't give anyone inspiration, claims to be the leader of the group when he makes no decisions, he's got 2 20 stats currently and has stolen every major boss kill when he was dm'ing out of the abyss now we're doing a homebrew campaign and I'm part dming I've just got a good look at his character.

>>51789798
He's got 12 levels in bard and 5 in fighter so total level 17.

>>51789830
You learn two new spell every time you level up. Its gonna be OK, Anon.

>>51789845
>Mortal arms
What did he mean by this?

>>51789830
Libraries in major cities should have books about magical stuff, make sure to ask about that when in town. Or a magic scroll vendor, the spells in this case will be pretty costly and will be kind of not worth it, but they'll be spells.

Also kings should have a court mage that they have on hand because defense against magical assassins should be high up on the king's priority. If the king, or lord, says "We have none of those here, our castle is protected with wards and guards against any magic." Then your DM either vastly underestimates magic in DnD or doesn't care about magic as much as you do enough in your setting. The latter is is more worrying than the former.

>>51789845
>Hey, druid, you get a free thing, but please don't hurt animals
That's like saying 'hey, fighter, here's a cool item, but please don't cast arcane magics'

The only concerning part is
>pretty powerful
Why does the party have a pretty powerful companion

>>51789881
Eh, well, playing at that level and not making sufficient bosses is kinda shit
They're clearly not going all-out as any real all-out guy could abuse wish at level 17, but they chose some shitty multiclass instead
I think they're not too much of a 'that guy'. Just a slightly sort of. I hope they at least use cutting words on allies.
>Homemade 2 handed sword
What


Anyway, if you're playing with fucking level 17 players I hope you know how to DM and give legendary resistances and cohorts to enemies and all that

>>51789911
It means he has to summon demons and undead to kill the creatures of the forest without the owl being upset.

>>51789921
I just got chucked in to part time DM this session and hadn't looked through the player sheet as assumed as the regular dm they would have their shit together. Clearly I was wrong

>>51789911
Steel basically, don't kill shit with swords
>>51789921
She can still hurt creatures, just not with weapons, use her magic or environment
>>51789928
Absolutely not.

>>51789952
>assumed as the regular dm they would have their shit together
A DM going from DM to player is MORE of a reason to check their shit over before playing. Never assume anything, anon

>>51789952
It's a very bad idea to DM a very high level party (Especially 17-20) without much experience. Otherwise, any experienced caster can make you their bitch with a fuckton of clones, demiplanes, wishes and all sorts of ridiculous shenanigans as well as pretty much making up rules since you won't know half of them.

>>51789973
That sounds even worse
You're restricting a druid from attacking forest animals (They're a druid, so why?) using weapons (They're a druid, so why?).

File: 1486936938836.jpg (24KB, 610x609px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 610x609px

>>51790017
>>51789973 (You)
>That sounds even worse
>You're restricting a druid from attacking forest animals (They're a druid, so why?) using weapons (They're a druid, so why?).

Because she wants to be a magical focused druid / sorc multi-class who is completely at peace with her surroundings
I don't know, I'm just meant to make this whole thing balanced.

>>51789607
>>51789609
lore wiz says
" If you roll damage for the spell when you cast it, increase the damage against every target by 2d10 force damage."

>>51790070
You've given a druid a restriction that druids practically already have.

I don't know, it could be balanced if the owl isn't some sort of demi-god that acts on its own. It's just a DMPC really.

>>51787014
This anon gets it.

>>51790111
And? A single target is still every target.

>>51790070
As the others say, the restriction is meaningless because no druid would attack animals when they have SO many other means to deal with hostile beasts. What is the druid getting anyway? What is this owl capable of doing?

>>51789557
There's nothing to "balance" vs spellcasters, as there's no "imbalance" in the first place.

Is potent cantrip a thing that still exists?

>>51789557
I thought the problem with caster supremacy is that casters are much stronger OUTSIDE combat. You can't fence yourself from one kingdom to another in blink of eye, or revive dead, or haunt them in their dreams till they die.

Our last wipe was because enemies knocked out our torch. Light, a fucking cantrip, would have saved us, then.

>>51790131
>>51790192
You'd probably think that Circle of the Land's anti beast, anti fey, anti plant features are useless, wouldn't you?

(it kind of is but it is campaign dependent)

>>51790131
>>51790192

The owl isn't anything like a demigod, it's more like a puesdo-dragon that can cast a couple low level NON COMBAT druid/nature spells (like guidance, resistance etc) and has the ability to communicate it's druid master and the walking personification of nature.

Which I think is pretty darn powerful at level 1

Maybe you guys can think of an idea that's better, I like fairness, but I also really like the owl

>>51790261
tg really hates stuff like henchmen, cohorts, etc.

>>51790189
I don't think targeting the same creature multiple times with the same attack makes it multiple targets for the same spell. What would imply that? You can choose a target for each of the missiles, yes, but if you hit multiple with the same one, they don't have unique targets, you're hitting a single creature twice with one spell, making it one target.

And all in all, I'd rather go with dividing the damage than have a lesser Nuke Druid going off. Make a 6 LoreWiz / 12 TwiDruid / 2 Fighter build for stupid damage output, which, while cannot nuke as hard, is a barrage that keeps on coming even after the original two nukes hit.

>>51790261
Well, sure, that's fine.

As long as the owl isn't bound like a familiar and isn't some sort of 'ressurects every time it dies' thing like a familiar.

It's basically a weak non-combat DMPC that has an association to the druid, so that's fine and maybe helps explain things like why the druid is bound to not hurt wildlife.

However, it'd be a bit unfair to then not give other players at least a slight bit of leeway in their backstories.

>Spell Secrets
>At 2nd level, you master the first in a series of arcane secrets uncovered by your extensive studies.
>When you cast a spell with a spell slot and the spell deals acid, cold, fire, force, lightning, necrotic, radiant, or thunder damage, you can substitute that damage type with one other type from that list (you can change only one damage type per casting of a spell). You replace one energy type for another by altering the spell’s formula as you cast it.
>When you cast a spell with a spell slot and the spell requires a saving throw, you can change the saving throw from one ability score to another of your choice. Once you change a saving throw in this way, you can’t do so again until you finish a short or long rest.

What's the silly shit you can come up with?

>>51790251
Yep. If you view it as something that needs fixing, my suggestion is this: give the party some utility items -AND- at the same time, give some borderline useless items that are obviously tailored for the casters.

A scroll of magic missile and a scroll of cure wounds will obviously go to the magic user and cleric under most circumstances, while the alchemy jug and bag of holding may go to the barbarian and fighter.

>>51790320
A vitriolic sphere of insults against a cha save.

My DM was complaining about some players in our games and he didn't mention me. So i asked him what his criticisms of me as a player were.

>You spend too much time out of game trying to figure out how to make your characters the most special snowflakes at the table

I think he's pretty on the nose with it. Though I think i should explain, cause it might be different than what people expect.

I tend to try and make some kind of multiclass build to make my own class. Basically I Gestalt 2 classes together and I try and build it into something functional. I've never done this for some kind of optimization, mostly just to better fit an idea.

>Lore Bard / Crown Paladin to be a Steward, a defender of the history and people of a certain location.


I also spend some time after each session figuring out if and how the events of the aforementioned session changed my character. Basically trying to see if what just happened caused a development in some way.

Analytical Wizard who worked in a Bureau of Magical Investigation encountered something he considers wholly evil.
>If anything I had ever seen in my life was evil, it would be that
And it destroyed his home city. So my wizard set out to figure out how to defeat it. Being the nerd he is, my wizard reasoned the following
>In all the stories I've read about evil, it is always defeated by a hero
>So logically, if I become a hero, i should be able to defeat this evil primal god thing.
So from there i told my DM that i thought it would be cool to train to be a hero and thus multiclass into Paladin, which imo is the "Heroic" Class.
I know Wizard/Paladin probably doesn't have any synergy, but I thought it made sense for the character.

In anycase I backpedaled on idea after the criticism. I want to be a better player and if this is an issue, i want to resolve it.

I also have a desire, though have yet to be able, to play something Monstrous like a Thri-kreen. Because I love drawing monsters and the like.

What do?

>>51790285
Actually, the nuke is still as strong, it just has more sustain.

http://anydice.com/program/ac32

On the first round, averaging 997.5 damage, 130.5 on the second, 116 on third.

>>51790261
It doesn't sound like there's anything wrong with that, really, it's just that the restriction was redundant. It's cool to have deities and such interfere with the plot, a couple of threads ago we were talking about how they're supposed to be very involved but most players overlook them if they're not clerics or paladins.

>>51790254
I don't really think that, it wasn't my point. On the opposite, I was talking about how druids have means to defuse combat with beasts, or at the very least they can ignore beasts well enough that they don't need to retaliate.

Does this seem like a good way to do a NE character in a mostly good party?

>NE Yuan-Ti Warlock
>Patron is Good (Likely a Fey or Seeker)
>Yuan-Ti isn't actively "evil kicking puppies for lels", rather they have a distinct mission from their patron (up to the DM) and will do "whatever they can get away with (NE according to the book)" to accomplish it, and as all Yuan-Ti sees people as tools to be used- however their Patron will them to cut that shit out if it becomes an issue (For the DM)

I'm making a character for every class so might as well get one for every class (Except CE probably just because there's no real way to do it in a non-evil party I can think of)

>>51787168
I like this a lot, but the morningstar is just a superset of the flail and the war pick.

I'd drop the morningstar to 1d8. Trade reliability in damage for versatility in damage type. You could add Versatile (1d10), too, if you think that's necessary.

Also, I think the Thrown on the battleaxe and warhammer is dumb.

As a DM how you feel about a dragonborn warlock refluffing hexblade to be them making a pact with a very old and powerful dragon?

>>51790285
You're extrapolating an elaborate and esoteric rule set solely from the word "every".

>>51790495
Why would it be Hexblade?

>>51790393
Basically you sound like one of those 'I need multiclassing to represent changes to my character' sort of players.

Also
>Gestalting
Vomiting intensifies.

Either way, you can easily refluff part of what you already have towards a concept. It just feels usually like random multiclassing as per story is really gimping yourself more than anything, and suggesting your character is highly volatile and will change their very essence at the drop of a hat, even if it's a really big hat.

I wouldn't say it's entirely bad, but at least I view as multiclassing as a way of giving more character design options, where you can start as an X/X for both a mechanical benefit and some sort of interesting flavour, rather than multiclassing being there to represent evolving characters.

I guess in an idealistic world character development would be at the forefront and multiclassing would be great for that, but I guess D&D isn't supposed to be some sort of TV show and while you want character development you don't want to go hardcore on it.


It's probably not too big a deal either way.

If I get a skill proficiency both from my class and my background, do you guys think I can excange it for something else?

>>51790539
duh. it's in the fucking rules that you can. Read harder.

>>51790539
You an invent a whole new background if you want. Just work with your DM.

>>51790536
Thanks! I will take this into consideration, any advice always helps :D

>>51790560
I must have missed it, my bad. Thanks.

>>51790534
The pact was so that the dragonborn can gain increased martial prowess in return for doing the dragon's bidding (up to DM whenever the dragon would ask my player for his services). Since Hexblade is the most "martial" of the warlock archetypes, I figured it was a good fit.

File: vamp-token-arm-behind-back.png (322KB, 985x985px) Image search: [Google]

322KB, 985x985px

I sometimes hear people mention putting things up "for sale" for 5e.

Could I do that with Tokens? I find myself making a bunch of tokens for my DM, and if I can get a few extra bucks from it I might as well.

Here's one for some smug Vampire bad guy. Would you spend your hard-earned shekels on it?

>>51790466
CE is entirely plausible.
You need some of these:

1. Something you can offer the party that proves essential.
2. Friendships or relations to the party.
3. To cover up your dickishness with apparant chaotic-goodness.
4. To not appear beyond saving, receptive to change.
5. To appear a lot less threatening than they really might be (Sort of 3.,but more clownish)
6. To be hard to get rid of in the first place, such as an important (to the party) noble's son.
7. Being accidentally useful.

.. And maybe some more, but if I go on the points will sound too much like each other.

The important thing is with a CE character is they do not have to hate everyone and be an edgelord, they do not have to have no friends, they do not have to dick everybody over at every opportunity and they do not have to be stupid.
What defines a CE is their selfishness, refusing to adhere to rules and, at the end of the day, wanting their well-being ahead of 95% of people they know.

For all you know your local burger flipper at McRonalds counts as a CE in 5e.

>>51790605
no.

>>51789532

https://twitter.com/Jackaraia/status/831210156708896768

Enough with this meme.

>>51790659
Nothing there says it isn't 2d10 multiplied for every magic missile.

Evocation wizard's +INT is only once per target and only applies once if you make several scorching ray attacks, yet still applies several times for magic missiles.

>>51790698
>Nothing there says it isn't 2d10 multiplied for every magic missile.
are you retarded or just stupid?

>>51790716

Clearly retarded.

>>51790517
I admit that I'm extrapolating, but am I wrong?

See >>51790659

>>51790698
Irrelevant. Word of God says no, it means it's a thing that will be in Errata and the final release. "Every" target means only once by one target. You cannot target a single character multiple times with one spell, you are targeting them once and just hitting more than one time.

>>51790659
Well okay then. I still think that's weird given how magic missile has been treated before, but if that's what they intended then that's what they intended I guess.

>>51790400

Sure... if they're alone, or there is exactly one beast.

I think a lot of people intuitively assume that fey, beasts, and plants won't fight druids, sort of like how some wouldn't expect some undead and fiends to see a train of undead and fiends led by an oathbreaker and a necromancer to go "Wow, I totally want to get in a fight with those guys!" but technically there's no real disincentive for either.

The real problem is the "mortal arms" part since, as people (perhaps you) have mentioned, attacking with weaponry makes no sense for druids, but hags, foo blights, shamblers, etc. have no reason to not kill druids as they'd kill anything else.

>>51790716
The following is confirmed correct:
"its 2d10 once per taret regardless of how many missiles hit."

You can also say the same of evocation wizard's feature:
"its +INT per target regardless of how many missiles hit"
Because it doesn't specify whether 'per target' means 'per damage roll' or 'final damage'.

>>51790727
Word of god implies no, but doesn't actually say no.

Obviously RAI is what they're suggesting, but they sure as heck didn't make a 100% clear ruling of it.

>>51790751
"I assume its 2d10 once per taret regardless of how many missles hit."
Jeremy Crawford: "That's correct."

i don't know how much clearer that can get. If all the missiles hit one target you get 2d10 damage, not 6d10. That's what the words "once" and "regardless" mean in the above question.

>>51790786
>6d10
It was never suggested to be 6d10, because you don't roll multiple times.

You roll once. It's magic missile.

For all we know Jeremy was just repeating the 'Yes, it's only 2d10, you don't roll multiple times for magic missile'.

>>51790807
You're not trying to argue for the 2d10 to be multiplied for multiple magic missile hits on someone, are you?

>>51790827
he is.

>>51790751
Well, the rule is about targets, and targeting a single creature multiple times with one spell is impossible. Of course, semantics, but unless each magic missile is counted as a separate projectile that targets (which they aren't, the missiles are directed to one or several targets, not individually). They work in clumps instead of as individual bullets.

>>51790827
Isn't that exactly how nuclear druid works?

The "one mile away" range isn't so bad when you consider most wizard spells need line of sight. Obviously it gets worse with multiclassing.
The best effect I can see here that's not even that OP is a much better Dimension Door.

>>51790837
I can see why people wanted to "win" at 3e (this is the game where archmages who could shoot spells through antimagic fields and huge earth elemental full casters that fight with reach weapons through antilife shells are core) but it is pretty amazing to see people who want to shit up 5e with the most munchkiny interpretation possible.

>>51790786

These are the same idiots who think Nuclear is meant to work that way too. They'll fight you on it forever, regardless of how wrong they are.

>>51790856
Yes, but Nuclear druid adds the Harvest Dice to a single DAMAGE ROLL, Alchemical Casting adds the 2d10 for EVERY TARGET.

>>51790856
or doesn't work, as we now know from Word of God.

>>51790866
flying tiefling, etc. (or just normal flying)

>>51790846
The way magic missiles works is essentially an area of effect that doesn't have an area of effect but instead has specific targets and can target the same creature several times.

At least by RAW, the only way it'd make sense that the 2d10 isn't multiplied for every missile is if the damage is added on after the normal damage calculations. If it's added to the damage roll, it would instead cause you to do (1d4+2d10+1)*Magic missiles damage.

You've only added the 2d10 once, which is consistent with even the tweets said up there.

Maybe if Crawford wasn't so busy responding to 'How do I play 5e' questions all the time they'd be able to properly clarify it rather than just saying 'yes'. What they really needed to say is 'The 2d10 applies after the spell's damage, once per target.'

>>51789485
>skilled
Take entertainer or outlander background (athletics or acrobatics as a freebie), take the invocation that gives you free persuasion and deception prof. There, skill monkey lock.

>>51790876
Okay, I'm starting to see the difference here.

Making magic missile a single roll for all darts was a mistake. It creates a glaring exception to abilities meant to only be applied once (e.g. harvest scythe, empowered evocation).

>>51790939

Now that RAW, RAI, and Word of God are against you, what will you munchkins do?

>>51790605
Check out roll20. They have a market thing where you can sell bundles of tokens.

>>51790939
How do you justify interpreting "you add the 2d10 once" as secretly meaning "you add the 2d10 a whole bunch of times?"

>>51790987
>what will you munchkins do?
not tell their DM's

What kind of name/title/honorific would you grant someone who's slain an ancient blue dragon? "The Dragonslayer" is pretty unimaginative.

>>51791005
I'll look into it, thanks friendo.

>>51791022
"stud" and let him fuck my wife, doesn't really matter what colour the dragon was

>>51791013
The same way it's justified that any other thing that adds to magic missile's damage ONCE essentially results in adding the damage a bunch of times.

Word of god states firstly that evocation wizard's ability only adds on once, yet also that magic missile then takes that single add-on of damage and applies it multiple times.

>>51790987
Isn't the RAW with it?
Word of god is ambiguous.
RAI is ambiguous, as it's part of word of god.

>>51791046
Oh I'm sorry, I didn't realize I took a wrong turn and ended up in /pfg/.

>>51791013
Anon means that because every Magic Missile can target separately, they always target separately.

Also, even though I am vehemently against this ridiculousness, I gotta admit it doesn't make any sense in-world to buff your magical missiles, but they do different damage depending on how many people you hit.

Like, why do the missiles suddenly do more damage if the second one hits the guy on the left instead on the right? I admit that doesn't make sense, but suddenly getting super-buffed Magic Missiles is also kind of shit.

intending to play Oathbreaker paladin, how do I play him so it isn't pointlessly edgy?

Backstory is 'conflict with paladin order, desire to bring justice still there, no moral boundries without the order's code, so he picks up dark magic to fight fire with fire'. The paladin's power system in this universe is based less around gods, and is more of a hybridization of the Force from SW and the Light from WC. Light Side, Dark Side, willpower and personal righteousness and the user's belief in their cause is what grants power.

So how do I make a dark paladin in this setting not a colossal edgelord?

>>51791022
It's unimaginative in a good way.
"Dragonslayer" isn't mimicking some tropes because they're fantasy conventions, you're talking about someone that has slain a dragon, it's just appropiate.
But if the dragon was known for other things than being a monster you could have them be "tyrant killer", "savior of the oasis" or "kobold chaser"

Would a strict refusal to lie, even at personal risk, be a Wisdom thing? I'm rolling a wizard and thinking about ability scores that aren't just "dump str because wizard", and he's brutally honest because he values truth and knowledge.

>>51791022
Lightning Tamer
Conqueror of the Desert King
Dragon Skull Basher-Inner

>>51788169

misty step is extremely handy, and counterspell can be useful (but you don't have a lot of slots to use on it)

>>51790605
>Would you spend your hard-earned shekels on it?
No, now that it's on my hard drive.

>>51791022
Lizard-Dicker

>>51791022
Gram, Nothung, Balmung?

>>51791022
Wyrmslayer, Killer of the Sandstorm, Dragonbane

>>51791073
Lawful Evil: take what you want within the allowance of your code

in other words, all PCs ever
LE is clearly supposed to be Dr. Doom but in no way is it required for an oathbreaker to be the least bit grim or edgy, although I do look at it as oathbreaker being less based off technicalities and more based off a climactically shameful event that results in people knowing the oathbreaker is a disgrace

either way, there is no reason a LE char would ever do anything abnormal

>>51791107
It would be a personal-choice thing. You don't need stats to be honest. Sometimes even the wisest and the smartest have oddly rigid ideas about how things should be.

>>51791128
Well not that one obviously, I mean ones of similar quality. That one only took about an hour to make altogether so I could make a pack of tokens of that quality in a day ez.

without all the background bits I forgot to erase, I forgot to check for those on that one

>>51791163
I know it doesn't actually have to be reflected in the numbers, but I feel like doing so. I'm mostly pondering if I want to give him low wisdom or charisma, because I can see arguments for either, and obviously wis is at least somewhat relevant for pretty much every character while cha could easily never come up.

>tfw no friends to play table top games with
why even live :(

File: CopelleToken.png (52KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 200x200px

>>51791170
Real talk though, those are pretty decent quality and worth paying for, however tossing them in roll20 will shrink them down to a ridiculous degree to where things like that will lose a lot of detail.

You may want to consider either utilizing a more SD style of art where details are too big to be lost from size scaling, or just use a mugshot for portraits. I've done the latter since the group I DM for has a lot of artists that make full-scale things.

>>51791216
To shitpost, apparently

>>51791226
yeah that was my first post ever on this board too

quality is about to go waaaaay down

For a Hexblade warlock, is it alright to skip Hex and instead rely on your curse? All the smite spells you pick up overlap with hex, and your curse adds your proficiency to damage - less potential damage but much more consistent, and at higher levels the difference becomes mostly academic.

>>51791216
Roll20 is your friend, anon.

File: BarbarianToken.png (256KB, 806x806px) Image search: [Google]

256KB, 806x806px

>>51791219
Yeah the usual player tokens are drawn a bit more cartoony with bigger heads/exaggerated features more like this one since they're tiny, for "boss" tokens I make them a bit more realistically proportioned since they're usually scaled up by the DM a little bit.

Small mugshots would be a lot faster to make though.

>>51791053
It increases the spell's damage against every target by 2d10. We KNOW for a fact how much damage is added to the singular target: 2d10. The class feature states it outright.
If the spell has one target, it has one target. The argument that magic missile has a multitude of targets, and one guy can be a multitude of targets, is unbelievably dishonest.
When asked, he said the 2d10 was added once per target regardless of how many missiles hit. Rock solid, indisputable clarification.
I don't know why people would bother asking a developer, and then whine because he didn't like the developer's explanation of why their shit wouldn't work.

>>51791212
To have low cha for a character that doesn't lie also implies they are very bad at it, but are also very bad at social interaction anyway.

The most important thing about a character with such rigid ideas would be that they are probably lawful.

But all in all, I think any level of wisdom can actually justify not lying. The lower it is, the easier it is to ignore the bad consequences that honesty can bring, and higher it is, the character can look past those temporary issues to think about how not lying affects the whole.

Just food for thought, though.

>>51791253
Hard to believe desu
Unless you start edition wars and rehash memes all day, you'll be fine
Welcome!

>>51791268
Also that one was the first token I made more as a test, so it's got a lot of sketchy and uneven lines to it and isn't centered.
That one probably only took 30 minutes to make.

>>51791277
i've single handedly ruined several generals :/ not even on purpose too

>>51791270
>I don't know why people would bother asking a developer, and then whine because he didn't like the developer's explanation of why their shit wouldn't work.

They already had an answer, they just wanted it to be proven correct. Since it wasn't, they reject the devs answer. They're hypocrites. If the dev answered in a way that reaffirmed their beliefs, they would have used it as proof, but since it doesn't, it isn't "proof".

>>51791020
If they try to rules lawyer it after the DM rules it out, you bet the DM will either know or not give a shit about what the power gamers totally believe the raw means (aka play it like 3.5)

>>51791303
/5eg/ is resilient
Even the dankest memes don't last more than two weeks, we don't usually engage shitheads, and oh my god I am ruining this thread

File: sigmund-freud-9302400-1-402.jpg (15KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 300x300px

>>51791304
also, they want to bang their mom.

>>51791270
The developer DIDN'T explain it.
That's the problem.

The developer just said 'yeah sure lol', essentially, to an already poorly worded question.

Had the question been worded better and he said 'yes' it would have been better, or if he had actually explained it.

I'm probably wrong about the multiple target thing, with magic missiles only targetting the same creature once. So it only applies the 2d10, the 1d4 and the +1 once for the damage roll. Which is then multiplied. But we can't really be sure, because there's nothing that RAW or RAI definitely says whether magic missile targets the same person multiple times or just once and deals damage several times.

Either way, the question didn't actually ask anything we needed asking, it just asked obvious RAWand got the obvious 'yes'. The real question is not whether the 2d10 applies multiple times, but whether the 2d10 applies to the damage roll or is entirely seperate.

>>51791344
see what i mean.......

>>51791333
then the powergamers sperg and attempt to crash the game.

>>51791268
A recommendation for when you do portraits for villains/enemies: make sure there's a small detail or two that betrays what the enemy can do. Looking at that token makes it clear that its a barb, however if you crop to the head & shoulders area for a token it can look like a knight or cleric in some players' eyes.

>>51791370
>then the powergamers sperg and attempt to crash the game.
Yeah so like 3.5.

>>51791358
continuing to argue about it doesn't make you less wrong.

>>51791395
Continuing to deny that they keep putting out ambiguous and sometimes completely against their RAI content and don't even respond in an appropriate way to fix it doesn't make it less of a problem.

>>51791270
The crux of the argument is whether or not the 2d10 is added to the damage roll of the magic missile (like harvest scythe or empowered evocation) or added afterward to each target affected by the spell.

At this point, I'm starting to believe the latter like you clearly do, but neither ability itself nor the word of god were actually crystal clear on this matter.

>>51791358
there is one target
2d10 is added per target (not per missile or per dice or per instant of damage)
remember, if a spell targets one person, the spell has one target
the 2d10 is a per target thing, not a per instance of damage thing, not a per bonus thing, if you had a theoretical spell called Mordenkainen's Missiles of Hypothyroidism which explicitly allowed you to do 1 damage per level but that it treated each as a separate attack, it would still only do 2d10
the only relevant part of the question is "if, theoretically, you could count, how many targets is one target?"
remember, the class feature specifically, specifically, specifically tells you how much extra damage the (one) target takes
its 2d10

>>51791436
Alright. So does this 2d10 add to the damage roll or does it add seperately?

That's honestly all that matters.

>>51791469
It's separate, by my reading. Once the rest of the spell has been dealt with, including how many creatures have been targeted, each target takes 2d10. Which is why it doesn't matter if a creature has been hit by one missile or 50. You're either a target or not, you can't be more of a target than any other target.

>>51791512
Well, I still think it's pretty ambiguous, and it doesn't really have anything to do with how many times something is targetted. Evocation wizard's boost applies, on scorching ray, to the first scorching ray if you want it to, but not the others. Similarly, the 2d10 could apply after the first scorching ray but not the others, which might be important as the 2d10 might kill it and the player might choose a different target afterwards. At least by how I read it, I imagine it a bit like evocation wizard's, except 2d10 instead of +INT.


I expect it's probably intended to not multiply with magic missiles either way for RAI, but I goddamn well wish they actually wrote content in a way that wasn't so damn ambiguous.

>>51791469
>>51791512
Neither of these anons.

Actually, that's where the it kind of goes into extrapolation territory, because you INCREASE THE DAMAGE BY 2d10 FORCE DAMAGE.

It isn't extra damage that is inflicted separately, so theoretically the bullshit of Magic Missile's damage multiplying applies.

Magic Missile is such bullshit, because if you INCREASE the damage, it basically is in the damage roll of the Magic Missile itself, where as INFLICTING the damage would be a different thing entirely.

But, it doesn't matter to me. I will play it RAI anyway.

>>51791566
It's all because of how they rule Magic Missile. Having it go off of a single roll for all darts instead of a different roll per dart is just weird.

File: third edition.jpg (25KB, 340x230px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 340x230px

>>51791392
Not really a good comparison, 3.5 is already a naturally crashed game in which the majority of combats will go like this:
0. assume fighter, monk, or barbarian pc
1. pc's turn
2. pc moves to attack monster
3. monster attacks him and grapple checks him; if he succeeds, he now probably can't do shit (due to massive str+size disparity), but lets say he somehow passes
4. pc does some probably unimpressive damage (if he uses a stunning fist, the DC is probably 24 or so base by level 20 vs a monster who probably has a saving throw of +20 by level 20 or more -- while his enemies probably have DCs at that point in the 30s)
5. monster now gets to FULL attack the PC, and probably has higher BAB, probably has higher str, and almost certainly has more attacks, and can benefit from power attack too
6. if monster instead does a 5' step and does a mind effect, the pc (who probably has a +6 will save at level 20 by default) needs a 17-20 to avoid instantly losing

That is a structural problem. I know the wizard is tier 1 and the fighter, monk, and barb are tier 5. I know the druid's companion compares favorably to him. I know of the crazy feedback loops. I know most of the abuses.

Above and beyond those, however, is this core gameplay problem -- that each and every foe you run into past level 6 or so is probably "you, but better" for the fighters/monks/barbs (and probably rangers and paladins too) -- that you and the enemy are both HitDudes, but they probably have a similar number of feats as the fighter, plus greater reach, plus greater strength, plus greater size (for grapples etc).

Nevermind that unidirectional antimagic field archmages, and huge earth elemental full casters with antilife shell and reach weapons, are both part of core -- the many ways in which fighters, monks, and barbarians are SHIT are eclipsed by the fact that most enemies are simply what the PCs do, but better, and certainly with better saves against ubiquitous mental jack fuckery.

>>51791612
"They" being the rule writers, if that wasn't clear.

>>51791423
>or added afterward to each target affected by the spell.
>>51791469


Fortunately, we have the pdf to fall back on.
count the targets

increase
the
damage
against every target
by 2d10 force damage.

(direct cut and paste from pdf)

>>51791582
>so theoretically the bullshit of Magic Missile's damage multiplying applies.
except then you didn't increase the damage to the target by 2d10, you increased it by 2d10 x #missiles.

>>51786930
>It turns advantage or disadvantage into basically a +/-5 modifier on average without making tasks suddenly impossible to succeed at or letting PCs do otherwise impossible tasks.
>It turns advantage or disadvantage into basically a +/-5 modifier
Target roll 11 normally: 50%
Disadvantage: 25%.
Advantage: 75%
>+/- 5.
Target roll 11 3d20 HR: 50%
Disadvantage: 12.5%
Advantage: 87.5%
>+/- 7.5.

TN 6|16: 75%|25%
D 56.25%|6.25%
>-3.75.
A 93.75%|43.75%.
>+3.75.
HR TN 6|16: 84.38%|15.62% -
D 41.19%|1.56%
>-8.638|-2.812
A 98.44%|57.81%
>+2.812|+8.638


Source:
http://anydice.com/program/ac34
Educate your dumb self.

>>51791648
Indeed, but as the damage is applied to the SPELL'S damage, which multiplies, shit is weird. The rules kind of break in on each other.

The damage isn't inflicted separately, and even though the 2d10 applies to each target, because of the really inconsistent wording with the rules, it becomes... Liminally possible. Again, I am not in the Pro-Nuke camp, but I gotta admit that the wording in the game is rather ambiguous.

Like, the two rules kind of overrule each other, but again, there is a saving grace in this.

>If there is a general rule and a specific one, the specific one applies

Thus I could safely say that the 2d10 per target kind of overrules how Magic Missile's damage is rolled.

>>51791665
Nice, you seem pretty good with anydice.

How would I do an entry that is both "take highest of two exploding dice?"

Specifically I want a system sometime that can use exploding d8s (because of how similar it is to 3d6), and that can use "roll 2d8 and keep highest 1," "roll 3d8 and keep highest 2," etc.

Ideally, each d8 that is kept should be able to explode separately.

I have no idea how to do this.

>>51791639
So when do we increase the damage? Before magic missiles hits, or after it hits?

>>51791648
>except then you didn't increase the damage to the target by 2d10 after the spell, you increase it by 2d10 before the missiles were resolved
ftfy

>>51791742
Google the result you want. That's how I found the @ thing (which makes it point to that placement of die, highest to lowest.).

My gut tells me it should be easy, since there's an exploding die function already.

http://anydice.com/program/ac35
Play around and see if you've got it.

>>51791639
See, the whole issue is that "increase the damage" makes it sort of sound like it's added to the roll, which is where the misinterpretation comes from.

I agree with you, man, but you're not accomplishing anything by continuing the argument. We've nailed down the point of disagreement as an interpretation issue. Saying "THIS IS THE ONLY WAY TO INTERPRET THE RULES" doesn't actually solve a RAI issue.

The only thing to do now is to agree to disagree until a more specific and definitive word of god comes along.

>>51791665
Why in the world are you doing 3d20?

>>51791865
Read the post chain.

>>51791865
I presume they're talking about Lucky or something.

How do you recognise the setting that you are playing, if the DM doesn't tell you?

>>51791885
locations, gods, planar structure, etc.

>>51791885
Try to look for recognizable names?

>>51791885
History and Arcana checks. Failing that, try libraries in major cities and ask if your character can spend some time learning local history.

5eg, I have a question on a regional effect:
>Divination spells cast within the lair have a 25 percent chance to provide misleading results, as determined by the DM.
Does that mean stuff like Hunter's Mark and Guidance, too? Would they them apply a penalty?

>>51791918
What part of "as determined by the DM" isn't grokable?

>>51791918
does not apply to those spells, only the divination spells that seek answers: Augury, Commune, contact other plane, etc.

>>51791918
If that's how your DM wanted to interpret it, then yeah.

>>51791959
and the "detect" spells

>>51791774
I would say it works like how I said it in >>51791738 meaning the alchemical casting actually changes how Magic Missile's damage is calculated, because Magic Missile's description doesn't have anything about effects that only apply to one target (because let's face it, Magic Missile doesn't work like any other spell in the game), we have to divide the damage of the Magic Missiles and the Alchemical Casting to separate rolls.

The rules conflict there. Because with Magic Missile, you do not apply the damage to different creatures separately, but (basically) instead roll the damage and give each target a multiplier for that damage. Because the Alchemical Casting increases the damage of the spell, it would mean it would be affected by this multiplier, but because it can only affect a creature once, it can't be.

The rules conflict, everyone is unhappy, Magic Missile is broken.

There's no need to continue this debacle, because I would again say that the way the two damages work and are rolled do not intermingle thus they must be rolled separately.

>>51791865
Sorry, I was talking about this madman's>>51787108 houserules from last thread.

>>51791254
depends on your build. if you're going eldritch blast hexblade then you should absolutely pick up hex. but if you're in melee and you get the smite ability, then you might be better of using your spell slot for something else. hex could be good with twf though if that's what you're going for

>>51789756
Playing anydice catchup for everyone else today, I guess.
http://anydice.com/program/ac36
All these statements are basically true. Though it does make 1d12 closer to 2d6, if not greater, which should be good enough.

>>51789285
No comments on the Loremaster Wizard fix attempt? Mostly just fixing the fluff, because spontaneous changing of spells is way too Sorcerer-y to accommodate the MOST ACADEMIC OF THE WIZARDS.

>>51787281
>She has been critically wounded and lost an arm now in a coma state
>She is also a necromancer
>They have not found out.
This is a perfect opportunity for her to go Pale Master and graft on a necrotically-powered skeleton arm.

>>51792063
Maybe I'm an idiot, but why do they need fixing?

File: 1486937646404.jpg (2KB, 125x119px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 125x119px

>>51792087
But Anon, that doesn't sound cute

>>51787108
You'd make to-hit (and any d20) bonuses even more insane then they already are. Bad save matchups would go from unlikely to basically impossible. High AC entities would be basically invincible to conventional attacks.

>>51791959
>>51791952
>>51791966
It's a little confusing since it just says "divination spells" in general. Either way, thanks anons.

>>51787313
>A character with 16 Str is going to have somewhat better odds at arm-wrestling a Str 10 opponent in 3d20 take mid as opposed to 1d20.
http://anydice.com/program/ac37
A +3 over the competition goes from winning 61.75% of the time to winning 64.63% of the time. This was not worth the effort.
(you) also need to see >>51791665 assuming you haven't already.

>>51791885

If there's a bunch of very high casters who could solve all the world's problem easily by themselves but refuse to do so, you are playing Forgotten Realms.

>>51791274
I think you're right about the lawful thing. No sense making him bad at perception or whatever just for one aspect of his personality. Plus a lawful neutral character would be a first for me. It works.

>>51792001
Well I'm currently planning on going sword and board with a rapier, so maybe it'll be better to forgo nova damage with smites and use hex for sustained damage. My AC should be high enough to avoid the worst concentration checks. Gonna skip magic weapon in favor of either using an actual magic weapon or taking the improved pact weapon line of invocations, so nothing is gonna compete with Hex for my concentration.

>>51792165
an easy way to think of it is that the effect says it can give misleading "results", added damage or a bonus to a d20 roll are not "results"

>>51792109
Well, mostly a personal opinion, but changing spells on the fly is basically Metamagic, and Metamagic is a Sorcerer thing specifically. My "fix" kind of changes it from being able to spontaneously cast new types of spells to actually having spell variants for it that need to be prepared.

Considering they're the most academic of all arcane traditions, having them need not rely on their books because "Well we just know spells so good we uhh... Don't cast our spells by the book anymore" seems extremely stupid to me.

Also, I also administered a soft nerf to them, because they are extremely and sickeningly strong otherwise. Needing to prepare variants as separate spells to get the most bang for your buck, AND needing to prepare spells beforehand (not just casting fireball as acid because an opponent happens to be strong against fire) gives them as much versatility while actually making it harder to attain it.

>>51787644
Just say the animated dead are going to subdue the enemy kingdom whether she leads them or not. That way if the PCs find a peaceful solution to the prince and the princess, they still have a final battle as they have to stop the undead army.

>>51792063
Like I said before, you can't really fix it because the features are just too powerful to coexist in a single archetype. It just needs a good beating with the nerf bat to be acceptable.

If you want specific criticism, then I'd say that you made the 3rd level spell slot burn too powerful by trying to shunt the save alteration into it. You're better off just sacrificing one or the other. The change to the damage type alteration you did is fine, I guess. Other than that, I'm not seeing any other significant changes.

>>51788542
Don't blame the DM. Blame the Dark Powers. They're assholes.

OK, blame the DM too.

>>51788908
There's invocations for more skills too, if you like.

>>51792284
>Don't blame the DM. Blame the Dark Powers. They're assholes.
I'm going to use that excuse for when i run CoS

>>51792255
I think I would be for taking away the +2 DC one then? Because I think that changing the spell's form is a more interesting option of the two, and taking it away entirely would just make the archetype way less interesting.

I'm thinking that the level 14 could be changed, maybe to something like making Experimental Spells into actual spells, maybe of one spell level higher than the original? I think the current, 14th level being almost like a minor wish is just annoying.

10th level for changing prepared spells is fine in my mind, it's basically a second contingency, and especially now that their spellbooks will be even more filled with new spells, it becomes doubly as important. Or should I disallow experimental spells and variation spells from the 10th level ability?

>>51788542
I'm glad this rarely happens and my players usually know what to expect from me (undead, humanoids or fey covers just about all my campaigns)

>>51789165
>sabre
scimitar or rapier
>falchion
longsword

New thread >>51792431

Anyone have /passive aggressive player/?

>use cover rules in PHB
>creatures directly in line of sight give half cover
>goblin shoots 16 AC ranger
>gets hit
>"you remembered to give me 2ac right? Just checking"
>next
>sitting on a hill, above a cave mouth where an *attentive**Orc lookout is on watch
>describe this as he hangs over the ledge and looks into the cave
>throws a rock to distract guard
>Orc notices riock, looks up, sees him hanging
>there's no way he noticed the rock

>>51789714
This is twisted by the example suggestions sounding totally unreasonable.

>>51792418
Add demons into the mix and you've got me
Good choices, friend

>>51789165
>>51792428
Falchions (real ones) are actually more similar to scimitars than longswords. Just use scimitars for both.

One of my players is requesting I allow UA invocations for his warlock. He's playing an archfey bladelock.

Is there any reason why I should?

>>51792593
To make your player happy. Better question: is there any reason you shouldn't?

>>51792593
The new invocations are pretty good, in the sense that they make Bladelocks suck a lot less. Archfey locks don't get that much, except of course for the only way to legally be a Ranged bladelock, which is pretty awesome.

>>51792593
Bladelocks are trash and need help.
Tell him sure, but if it turns out to be OP you'll be changing your mind.

>>51792593
It makes bladelock not shit.

Allow it on the grounds they don't multiclass with it just in case there are some broken combinaitons you could do with it.

Do acknowledge that it encourages bladelocks to throw away all their invocations in return for MORE POWER but losing all their non-combat utility isn't exactly the worst thing when you consider fighters already have minimal levels of out of combat utility. And those invocations could already be spent on beefing up eldritch blast spam power anyway.