/5eg/ - Fifth Edition General

Opinions on Gaze of Khirad from the UA?

I took it for my Warlock and it feels awesome, although our Rogue seems a little salty about this development.

We're playing CoS and we're planning to use it to avoid Strahd in Ravenloft.

Would this work?

What Half-elf is best elf? Same question for Halflings as well.

>>51803632

Remind me what it does / prerequisites?

>>51803637

high elf for the cantrip
Standard for the skills

>>51803632
Why would the rogue be salty about that?

>>51803666

if it's the one I'm thinking, it makes perception checks from him a little redundant

>>51803666
I'm guessing because being able to see through walls defeats the point of stealthily scouting ahead.

>>51803646
Gaze of Khirad
Prerequisite:
7th level, the Great Old One patron
You gain the piercing gaze of the blue star Khirad. As an action, you can see through solid objects to a range of 30 feet until the end of the current turn. During that time, you perceive objects as ghostly, transparent images.

Anyone have any good tips for livening up LMoP? I'm playing mostly with new players who are all really into Game of Thrones.

How do I make games fun with fewer encounters per long rest? Neither me nor my group like a lot of combat and we usually get one or two encounters per long rest (they prefer pushing the story forward and roleplaying and combat is a lot of bookkeeping). This makes classes with a lot of skills per short rest (warlock, fighter) less useful and makes the others (wizard, paladin) shine.

I have considered just extending the long/short rest period to week/day respectively. Anybody got any better ideas?

>>51803632
I really want that ability but I forsee my DM getting rather annoyed that it trivializes finding secret rooms and other hidden things. Combined with how they already think Warlock is "OVERPOWERED" and picking that seems like it'd result in rocks falling squid man dies.

>>51803637
Regular half-elf.

>>51803692

it's a rather short range. Don't know how you're going to avoid Strahd with it, considering he has greater speed than that, ontop of his other tricks, like blinding you with magical darkness

>>51803713
plus the fact that he is Strahd and if he got tired of the cat and mouse game, he could probably just go through the wall.

>>51803751

or he could line the walls with so many bats and shit that they'd block out x-ray vision

>>51803751
>>51803773
or he could turn to mist and make you get addicted to huffing him

>>51803632
>Would this work?
>>51803702
All I'll say is I wouldn't rely on it. CoS has done a pretty good job making sure players can't bullshit their way to victory.

What is the official AL stance on wish?

>>51803702

Maybe if you're not really annoying about it and "always have it on", like some dickbag druid spamming Guidance

>>51803842

Dont know of any AL legal use of Wish other than replicating spells. Most adventures don't go past level 15

I know there is a luckblade in CoS but that's about it

>>51803851
>>51803702
genuinely the only thing warlocks are good for besides an invisible respawning scout that can be milked for poison is the fact that they can use medium power effects with great regularity, so as a DM I would personally be happy to let them "trivialize" finding sekrits

>>51803879
Warlocks are probably the best ranged combatants, I'd say.

If they make good use of repelling blast, they're hardly weak, especially if they then also get that new invocation that slows enemies by 10ft. But that requires feylock rather than GOOlock.

>>51803879

Thing is, while that is certainly the edge they have over casters, they both have to co exist with martial players, and a task that can be safely trivialize away from a caster, might be a main feature of a martial who becomes that much more niche than before.

There definitely is something to be said about things like when a level 1 revised ranger dip completely obliterates the entire survival feature of the game

Why is the regular human so fucking boring?

>>51803915
>survival
>a feature of the game
What's it like to have/be a shit DM?

Does the disadvantage that the Instruments of the Bard invoke on charm saves only apply to the spells that come with the instrument and are cast using the instrument? Or any charm effects that the bard casts? I.e. a Tiefling Variant Bard casting Charm Person using their Devil's Tongue but uses the Instrument of the Bard as a casting focus.

>>51803915

I don't know what warlocks would be competing with martials about. Rogues have no room to cry about anything -- ever -- as they're both great in and out of combat, and at least one paladin player I know claims they consistently do more damage against, say, undead than his character did.

>There definitely is something to be said about things like when a level 1 revised ranger dip completely obliterates the entire survival feature of the game

UA is UA, I don't take it seriously, but what the heck is "the entire survival feature of the game?" having to buy food and drink?

Let's say I use Mage Hand to carry a vial of holy water 30ft and pour it onto an enemy. What would be the appropriate roll to see if it misses?

>>51803962
Because human players are spoiled from being the best race around or one of them in every other edition and not used to joining the ranks of almost all other races, being incredibly niche, incredibly irrelevant, or both.

>>51804018
--IF-- your DM allows that, it would probably be an attack roll with disadvantage or a low dex save for the target

>>51804018
Melee spell attack

>>51803994
Charm person has no material components, so you can't use the instrument as a casting focus.

I'm not sure if you can't find some way to apply the instrument even if it's not being used as a focus, though. Does the instrument apply to non-material-component spells?

>>51804051
>>51804018
Seconding melee spell attack.

>>51804047
>--IF-- your DM allows that

Mage Hand description specifically says it can pour out vials. Why wouldn't it be allowed?

>>51803904
>Warlocks are probably the best ranged combatants, I'd say.

Is that including fighter marksmen and rogue crossbow faggots?

>>51804062
because mage hand also says it can't be used to attack.

>>51804077

I get that I can't give it a knife and have it shank someone, but it CAN pour out vials. Do the metaphysics of the universe rearrange themselves to deny Mage Hand its usual vial-tipping properties if the contents can damage someone? Let's take this a step further. What if I use mage hand to pour oil on someone so that I can set them on fire? Would Mage Hand know this, and refuse to our the vial in this case?

Has anyone here looked at Amethyst Quintessence at all?

It's a third party sci-fi RPG using 5e as a base. I'm wondering if it's any good or not.

File: Very rough damage expectations by level and class.png (23KB, 759x471px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 759x471px

>>51803998
>Rogue
>More damage than a paladin against a target paladins get a boost against
Just how bad are they?

I'll bring up this rough graph of DPR expectations, which doesn't consider things like crits (Both rogues and paladins benefit notably from crits but it wouldn't change the graph too much) and burst damage (Paladins have the best burst damage in the game)

Rogues are pretty lackluster in terms of damage, but they're not bad. What sets rogues away from other martials to make up for their lesser damage is flexibility and out of combat ability.

Once you can see through walls, no longer the rogue needs to check for secret rooms, check for 'most' traps, check ahead for enemies by stealthing ahead, check for this or that. Because the warlock already knows all of that shit.

>>51804064
Yes. Unless the warlock goes fighter sorlock / sorlock, their damage will be definitely behind fighter and probably behind rogue, but their 10ft pushback ability is crazy. If you use it right, enemies won't ever be able to even reach you to attack you or your party.

If your party isn't mostly ranged, however, that won't be much benefit.

>>51804126

What if you fight something so big it can't be pushed?

would multiclassing ranger into sorcerer be a bad idea

>>51804148
RAW there is nothing that is so big it can't be pushed.

Any sensible DM would have it where big enough creatures can't be pushed, but in that case you simply apply different tactics. It's not hard to trap a big creature in a room or something if the environment is right.

Or, at least, big creatures are only single targets so you can run away from them much easier than you can a hoard of goblins.

>>51804152
Literally why.jpg

>>51804107
>Do the metaphysics of the universe rearrange themselves to deny
Quite possibly.

Mage Hand says it can't attack, and yet at least two people suggested that pouring a vial onto someone would be a spell attack roll. Meaning that they both see it as an attack. Which mage hand forbids.

>>51804111
Presumably his campaign experience was primarily stuff before level 4.

I don't know whether X ray vision is going to help too much finding hidden traps and enemies (as the skill defines them). Overall the rogue player in that guy's game needs to stop being a little bitch. If anyone took Chain Pact, I bet he'd feel emasculated by a tiny invisible gremlin too.

>>51804051
>>51804059

In 5e, what's the difference between melee spell attack 30ft away and ranged spell attack?

>>51804152
What do you want out of your character that you feel the need to take those classes?

>>51804126
Noted, thanks.

>>51804107
The problem is not that Mage Hand can't pour the vial, the problem is it doesn't have enough accuracy to pour it over a moving creature who does not want to get touched by holy water.

A vampire will see that ethereal hand coming over with a vial, will figure out what's going on and dodge out of the way. If I were feeling generous I might make the undead roll a very low Dex save.

File: 1469100405575.jpg (59KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 1280x720px

>>51803605
#LayTheGorgon

>>51804186
thought it would be a neat gimmick to add onto the character
the dm said the reasoning for why was solid i just dunno if i wanna go ahead with it

>>51804206


What if it's not holy water, but regular water? And I just pour it on the ground. And as a result of pouring it on the ground, an ant drowns. Is mage hand going to scan the immediate vicinity for any life form that could possibly be damaged as a result of its actions, then refuse to comply accordingly?

>>51804186
As a DM I see no reason to forbid pushing back big monsters, its all abstracted into one saving throw, as opposed to in 3e where something like that would probably be, roll a ranged touch, roll a spell resistance check, roll a saving throw, and roll a bull rush.

If you don't like gargantuans being pushed around, I'm pretty sure it being clipped on terrain/other monsters would arrest its movement, by RAW anyway, not sure.

>>51804271
1. ants aren't a definable target by the rules
2. it isn't performing an attack action of any kind
3. dropping a burning torch on a pile of gunpowder isn't an attack action
4. we've been over this shit for the last fucking forty years continuously with hemming and hawing over Invisibility

>>51804210
Many traps feature hidden areas that store parts of the trap, such as boulders. Seeing through those will instantly give away those traps.

Some enemies could still remain hidden, but normally you can't see the enemies until you turn around a corner, and you can carefully analyze the environment for monsters before turning a corner.

I can imagine the rogue would be quite pissed because it's a massive out of combat advantage, that while it might not directly conflict with all of what he does, it's some sort of crazy new UA content that could well seem broken to them. And there's not a lot of broken UA content for rogues.

That said, a lot of paladins don't pick up PAM or whatever and they might not use smites on crits or they might waste their spell slots on other things, or the rogue might have gotten lucky or they might have rolled for stats and skewed damage like that, or there might have been magical items. There's a number of ways a rogue could do more damage, but in a normal situation the paladin should be a better damage dealer.

>>51804281
There is no save to avoid being pushed back. You simply have to hit it. It's kinda a bit bullshit, and there's no real weakness to the eldritch blast fiasco. If it works on gargantuan monsters, you can essentially push-stun-lock a creature into a corner because any time it tries to advance out of that corner you just push it back into the corner, not even legendary resistance can save it.

>>51804206
It makes sense to allow the vial spilling as an attack because its an attack that forms out of the actual intended use of the spell. Mage Hand is a utility and the vial spilling is making use of the utility. It's different than using Mage Hand to slash a sword or punch someone, which is what the "mage hand cannot attack" clause is supposed to prevent

>>51804111

I'd ban anything that wrecked a significant part of a class like that.

As I see it, the most important rule about class balance is that every class should have a niche in the party that does not get overshadowed. If the fighter (for example) has one trick in that he hits things very hard, no one should be hitting harder.

Magic can, technically, do anything the GM allows, so they have to lock down hard on setting those bounds.

>>51804271
I'm not your DM. You aren't going to trap me in hypotheticals. Mage Hand cannot be used to attack. That's how I rule it. Don't like it? That's fine, you aren't playing in any of my games (since i am not running any at the moment), so don't get your tits in a twist. Ask YOUR dm how he runs it. If you are the dm run it how YOU want.

>>51804297
>3. dropping a burning torch on a pile of gunpowder isn't an attack action

how is that any different from dropping holy water on something

>>51804333
how is dropping an inanimate object on an inanimate object different from dropping an inanimate object on a creature with the intent to harm it? Seriously?

>>51804356

Yes. How does whether or not the creature can move change my capability to DROP SOMETHING?

There's a world of difference between "it would probably miss" and "you just can't drop it"

>>51804323
Then the only question is - does allowing a warlock to spend an invocation to at-will see 30ft in all directions through walls going to overshadow many other players?

I'd definitely say yes if there's a rogue who's keen on doing things like checking the environment and scouting for enemies.

Personally I'd rather the ability to be to see some sort of otherworldly realm portrayed upon the current one, which often gives hints as to the surroundings - the warlock might sense an eeire void of otherworldly presence in a holy area, or various ghostly apparitions in an area where many people have died recently, or the faint call of arcane magical power near a magic item. But that's too subjective to list as an invocation ability.

>>51804307
Then yes, its perfectly fine that the warlock can use a limited slot on X ray vision, considering all the rogue did was get uppity and entitled over one (1) skill, Perception. This is the problem with entitlement mentality players -- they hear "we need a rogue in the party, to find traps" they get the impression that only one char can find traps and feel entitled to be the only one who can do it.

>I can imagine the rogue would be quite pissed because it's a massive out of combat advantage,

Imagine if every character class in the game felt as much entitlement over every single skill as the rogue does for his. Imagine if the fighter shit himself with fury because a druid cast Dominate Beast and he wanted to roll Handle Animal. Imagine if the wizard with Medicine had veins bulge out on his forehead and go into nerd rage because his academic training in medicine was obviated by a god botherer saying a prayer and curing a disease or blindness instantly.

Imagine, if you will, a terrifying parallel universe in which all players were as much cunts as that guy's rogue player.

>UA content

then again this is a good point

The player in question found that his smites just couldn't keep up, and most of the campaign was levels 1-3.

>>51804307
You're right, I thought it was a cantrip that relied on a failed target save. Does seem pretty good -- ESPECIALLY because a lot of DMs especially like heavy duty melee focused bruisers.

>>51804385
>>51804323
Oh, wait, I might've misunderstood something, if it's as >>51804395 said and they have to spend a spell slot to do it then it's perfectly fine, because they can't use it all the time.

>>51804411
Most enemies are strongest in melee, so good tactics and staying away has great benefit to the party.

>>51804395
I'm sure it affects a bit more than just perception, because not even perception can do as much as seeing through walls.

But as above, it's not overshadowing too much if they have to spend a spell slot to do it. That's much more limiting, encouraging the warlock not to do it all the time and giving them a reason to let somebody else check sometimes.

>>51804383
fine, i will change my stance to "mage hand will always miss creatures" instead of "no you can't attack with mage hand, stop trying to fucking game a cantrip you stupid sack of shit"

Better?

>>51804323
Finding traps was more of a significant element of the warlock than the rogue in this situation, actually, and the warlock sacrificed more to get it.

>so they have to lock down hard on setting those bounds.

The problem with magic lies in 9/9 casting progression types doing whatever they want with just an expended spell slot. A third rate class like a warlock using one of his precious slots just to be a good scout (when the warlock is almost entirely a class about scouting and shooting) is not unreasonable, just because it involves magic.

>>51804333

>drop holy water
>it lands on the ground and breaks
>drop torch
>it lands on the ground and begins burning

File: elemental3views.gif (96KB, 1468x855px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 1468x855px

Looking at Artificer for a new character.

I've heard people mention using the level 6 Servant as a mount, thought this was the coolest shit, and came up with this.

>Artificer Alchemist
>Servant is Giant Constrictor Snake fluffed into golem suit
>Take Mounted Combatant
>Use Dodge action on my turn, make enemies attack me instead of the snake
>When enemies are grappled by Constrict hit them with acid vials since they have disadvantage on Dex saves

Is there any reason this wouldn't work? I'd say Allosaurus would be good too, but the snek has Blindsight and that shit is a lifesaver.

>>51804429
no, they sacrifice a permanent invocation slot, just to do what the rogue does with one of his many skill slots but better

this is a lot more significant than a spell slot, because the spell slot use could just let him find traps when needed and switch out

>>51804395
>>51804429
But I should probably add on not to undervalue rogue's place as a skillmonkey.

Given their main advantage isn't damage or being able to stun enemies over and over but instead having super beefy skill checks and good dex for stealthiness, it's hardly comparable to someone overshadowing someone's medicine skill, which is always pretty useless.

I'd compare it more to, say, a fighter stealing monk's speed bonus somehow. Except in this case it sounds like they can only steal it at the expense of a pretty precious resource.

>>51804395
Doesn't require a spell slot.

>>51804429
>I'm sure it affects a bit more than just perception, because not even perception can do as much as seeing through walls.

Its like comparing Medicine to the Life domain, or Nature to the Nature domain, and so forth.

The rogue is upset because something he can do for free is being replicated by someone who spent a whole Invocation slot on. ie. he has literally zero valid room for griping

>>51804464
You can swap out invocations on level up just like you can swap out spell slots.

Either way, being able to do this at-will is an insane level of utility if you go in dungeons a lot, and it really trivializes certain aspects of the game.

>>51804482
The rogue spent an entire set of class levels on being good at skills. If they didn't want to be good at messing about with dungeoneering skills, they could have played a different class.

>>51804466
Monk speed is an important feature of the class and more comparable to Cunning Action. This is just a skill the rogue has. He has four skills. What room is there to complain?

>>51804496
>You can swap out invocations on level up just like you can swap out spell slots.

Unless the warlock thinks that there will be traps at level 3 and no traps at level 4, I don't see the problem.

>The rogue spent an entire set of class levels on being good at skills.

The warlock took 2 levels to get 1 invocation, the rogue took 1/2 of one level to POSSIBLY get a boost to Perception, though I don't think we know that.

What a minor thing to gripe about.

>>51804437
>Better?

I mean, you're no longer trying to claim mage hand is sapient, and judges the results of its actions, and can refuse to follow orders, so yeah.

>stop trying to fucking game a cantrip

What's "gaming" to you? Using a spell for anything other than the most obvious and straightforward purpose?

Now, what about Arcane Trickster's mage hand. If I can stow an object in your pockets without being noticed, I can probably get a vial over your head without being noticed, right?

>>51804429

>Most enemies are strongest in melee, so good tactics and staying away has great benefit to the party.

Its especially good in campaigns which abide by default encounter formulas too.

Schwasbuckler needs to max charisma?

>>51804383

Well, you can attack with things that are not attacking things, such as picking up a chair and dropping it on someone's head

For a "holy water on a vampire" drop with mage hand, maybe I'd rule an improvised weapon attack with your spell casting ability MOD against whatever the thing you were trying to interact with

>>51804571

no more than a monk needs to max WIS

>>51804604
So yes?

File: 1480893771459.jpg (213KB, 337x368px) Image search: [Google]

213KB, 337x368px

>>51803879
>mfw my DM thinks Warlocks being able to do a bunch of stuff at will and stuff like being able to see through Darkness is "really OP because utility". Their favorite class is Wizard.

It's in my best interest to just not bring it up I think.

>>51804538
Well, as the fp-Warlock player, I didn't even know that I could swap invocations. Somehow had missed that.

I have basically specced all of my Invocations to my character's eyes, save for thirsting blade because I'm a bladelock (Was allowed to use a crossbow as a pact weapon). It's basically my character's schtick (Devil's sight, Eyes of the Runekeeperand now Gaze of Khirad).

I am not planning on changing the invocations anyway, to be entirely honest.

File: lewd.png (54KB, 315x320px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 315x320px

>>51803879
>can be milked for poison

>>51804635
>crossbow as a pact weapon

B-but

Eldritch Blast

>>51804509

Rogue having 4 skills and being a "skill guy" is also a class feature. It's not at all comparable to a wizard using medicine. More comparable to like, a barbarian doing something that trivializes one of the wizard's spells.

>>51804571
Uhhh, no.
Why would you think that?

>>51804509
Rogues get four skills, expertise, reliable talent, thieves' tools proficiency, low ability dependence (only really needs con and dex, can put a tertiary skill somewhere for better skill checks) along with that being light armour+high dex giving them good stealth checks for scouting. They get things like advantage on stealth (thief) or bonus action hide actions or moving faster or this and that. Evasion to help them avoid certain traps.
It's easily more than just a monk speed boost, there are several features that help towards dungeoneering that are all made at least half obsolete when you get someone on the scene who can
>Map out all of the dungeon within 30ft, locate all hidden loot and treasure
>Map out the location of all enemies within 30ft (providing enemies count as objects, which I hope they do)
>Map out the location of most mechanical traps built into the dungeon (they'd leave very obvious impressions in the dungeon's design)

And all of this without even really needing skill checks providing no monster is actively hiding, unless the DM's trying to nerf the feature.

Even if the rogue specializes in something OTHER than dungeoneering such as social interaction, I can see them getting pissed at this because to me it looks pretty overpowered as a single invocation instead of, say, 'detect magic at will'.
Even if the rogue didn't always be the one who found the traps before, the warlock's stealing all the glory.

>>51804655
It's pretty retarded of him but with the new UA Invocations it's at least somewhat less so since you can make your hand crossbow into a +3 hand crossbow.

Still objectively worse than EB unless he basically lives inside an anti-magic field.

>>51804538
>Rogues POSSIBLY want expertise

If you don't want expertise, you probably don't want to play a rogue. You probably want to play a monk or something.
If you don't take advantage of rogue's out of combat features, you'll end up pretty weak.

Also, again, it's not just perception. There are several skills you need to scout a dungeon effectively without getting fucked over by everything.

Want to peek around the corner? Stealth, maybe perception, maybe some saves if you set things off, maybe some running, maybe some investigation if you see things...

Want to peek around corner as a warlock? Just ask the DM to tell you everything that's there.

>>51804669
>Religion is Intelligence
>Medicine is Wisdom
Well I find that a bit counterintuitive. Anyway, a cleric is fairly likely to have the same Perception score, and a wizard the same Investigation score, as a rogue who is specialized in either.

>More comparable to like, a barbarian doing something that trivializes one of the wizard's spells.

Again, we are talking about a trifling minor element of the rogue he got at level 1 (1/2 a 1 level ability) vs something he got for 2 levels.

The only grey area is that its Unearthed Arcana japing jack fuckery but its not remotely stepping on the rogue's toes, and we don't even know that the rogue picked Perception as an expertise skill. Even then, Perception is still the most frequently rolled skill around, and would still come in handy for everything that is not Perception to see through a solid object (wut).

Do you lose the spell slot when you use Divine Smite and then whiff the attack?
>when you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack
tells me that it only goes off and costs a slot if you hit, but dm insists otherwise

>>51804739
>Again, we are talking about a trifling minor element of the rogue he got at level 1 (1/2 a 1 level ability) vs something he got for 2 levels.

What? Are you fucking for real? I don't think I could come up with a stupider way of looking at this.

>>51804765
Better than that - you don't even have to decide to use it until you know you've already hit.

>>51804739
>Again, we are talking about a trifling minor element of the rogue he got at level 1 (1/2 a 1 level ability) vs something he got for 2 levels.

a wizard definitely has more spells than a rogue has skills.

>Religion is Intelligence
>Medicine is Wisdom
Well I find that a bit counterintuitive.

Agreed, my 2edgy fedora-tipping wizard character who has no use for divine beings has a positive religion score just because of his INT. Of course, I'm the kind of person who thinks a 20-STR, 6-CHA half-orc should be good at intimidating people, but what do I know?

>Anyway, a cleric is fairly likely to have the same Perception score, and a wizard the same Investigation score, as a rogue who is specialized in either.

Yeah, but can either of them scout ahead, peak around the corner without being seen, AND investigate? Maybe the wizard, but it's not going to be ab at-will ability for him.

>>51804674
>It's easily more than just a monk speed boost,

A small proportion of a single skill that the rogue is likely to use. So yeah, its a trifling concern, less than a monk's speed boost.

>a whole lot of stuff

The only thing being obviated is that the warlock's perspective is being able to scout as if he is on a flat featureless astral plain. As with most japing jack fuckery of UA, the ability is horrendously explained and its not at all clear how to determine what effect getting to see through solid objects would have.

I'm pretty sure objects are objects, and creatures are creatures. Both are defined game terms.

>the warlock's stealing all the glory

Entitlement mentality over about one of his 4 skill picks being slightly undermined is not the warlock player's fault, and ideally the DM should ignore that sort of cuntishness.

>And all of this without even really needing skill checks providing no monster is actively hiding, unless the DM's trying to nerf the feature.

What? Bullshit. Why would it negate hiding?

>>51804803
>Why would it negate hiding?

How do you hide behind something that I can see through?

My entire group has trouble roleplaying, myself included. We're a mixture of super close friends and seatfillers and, while I try to roleplay, the sessions usually end up devolving into our inside jokes and simply rolling to do shit. While this still is pretty fun, I was looking for some tips to help "get into it" better. Any advice?

File: laughing3.jpg (66KB, 500x578px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 500x578px

>>51803915
>survival feature of the game
This game has no survival feature. There's just a skill called "survival" and rations listed at 5sp a day.
Even if you ended up stranded in the wilderness, casters can create food and water from nothing.
If someone feels like a big boy wilderness survivalist because they took the 1 level ranger dip it's actually funny.

>>51804702
>misquoting someone on purpose to make them wrong makes them wrong

Amazing. Who'd have guessed?

>Also, again, it's not just perception.

Also, again, it is just a small portion of perception, ie. whatever hazy part of perception is obviated by X ray vision. Stone traps, hidden compartments that drop sneks on you, pit traps, and so forth. Even in a campaign with literally no traps, however, perception is still likely to be the most rolled skill around.

>There are several skills you need to scout a dungeon effectively without getting fucked over by everything.

Rogues in no way own scouting, that's as much a warlock thing as a rogue.

This is incidentally one of the big features of having an imp familiar.

File: 1485714193097.jpg (83KB, 569x571px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 569x571px

>>51804803
>the warlock's stealing all the glory

This is THE DUMBEST SHIT.

YOU ARE NOT PLAYING A COMPETITIVE GAME. IF AN ALLY GETS AN ABILITY THAT HELPS THE ENTIRE PARTY IT IS A GOOD THING.

God forbid a Warlock actually have a reason to go clear to 7 instead of taking a 2-level dip and fucking off to LITERALLY ANY OTHER CHA CLASS!

>>51804801
>a wizard definitely has more spells than a rogue has skills.

everyone in the fuckin party can have Perception and the wizard probably has the same Perception modifier as the rogue. No wait, finding traps is wisdom nowadays, so turn to the wizard for theological questions, turn to the cleric and rogue for finding traps.

> but it's not going to be ab at-will ability for him.

Just use Voice of the Chain Master if you want to be a recon warlock man, and you can see more than objects.

Any advantage in having no stat under 10?

DM: You find a treasure chest
Rogue: I want to carefully inspect this with my thieves' tools or perception or something to check for traps.
Warlock: Shut up, rogue. I look through the chest. What's in there?
DM: It's obviously a mimic.
Warlock: I'm so glad I didn't risk my hand like you were about to, rogue.

DM: The shadey noble seems to be a bit tense as he's telling you all this.
Rogue: I want to try insight. This whole set-up and this room seems kind of -
Warlock: I activate see-through-walls. Anything suspicious?
DM: There's clearly some bandits outside waiting to ambush you.

DM: Okay, so you need to find the hidden room that was mentioned. Where do you start?
Rogue: I-
Warlock: See through walls.
DM: You win, congratulations.

DM: You hear a grunting from the other side of the wall. What do you do?
Rogue: I want to climb over very carefully and stealthily to check t-
Warlock: See through walls.
DM: Three Orcs.
Warlock: Thank you.

Rogue: Who wants to gamble? I'm good at cards.
Warlock: Okay, who wants to play this new gambling game? You put this under a cup and move them around and I tell you where it is. If I get it right, give me all your money.
Rogue: Oh for fucks sake.

Rogue: I check for tra-
Warlock: I see through walls.
DM: There's a hole in the floor ahead. Pit trap.

DM: All the doors are locked. Which door do you want to try to get through first?
Warlock: Just tell me what's behind every door and I'll tell you.

>>51804886

no negative modifiers on any kind of save

>>51804821
Guess it depends on objects, whether the haziness works as concealment.

>>51804695
Yes, it is worse than EB, but you know what is worse than using a crossbow as a Bladelock? Being boring as fuck. Like, some would say that making a Warlock and not using their class abilities is to the fullest is dumb, but with a little retooling of one feature of the class, my Warlock stands different from the rest, at least by teeny-weeny bit.

I'm not saying that my Warlock is good or anything, that is mostly up to how you play the character. But getting what I want (and you will now scream as I say, A heavy crossbow) has made me more interested in playing the character and makes me roleplay more.

>>51804847
Actually, the sad thing is that Invocation level limits come from total level, not Warlock level. That basically makes it so that there is no reason to not go Sorlock.

>>51804893
I admit, kinda funny. And what I kind of fear it becomes, but I'm trying to limit myself from using it all the time because at its most ridiculous, that's what it becomes.

>>51804886
NPCs don't get to make fun of you for being an uneducated hunchback with a lisp.

>>51803637
Half drow, because drow.

>>51804831
>Misquoting
What else is 'half of one level' supposed to mean? The only logical case is you're talking about rogue's level 1 which gives sneak attack, thieves' cant and expertise. The rogue's level 6 expertise is the only thing they get at that level.

>hazy part of perception
You use perception to listen in to things you otherwise can't see, or to try to see things that are hidden. When you can see through walls, you need to do neither. You don't even need to search the walls for things that are out of place to find a hidden entrance or any of that.
The only thing you might need to use perception on while x-raying is perhaps extremely dim light or a monster trying to blend in to the environment.

You can clearly see a hidden compartment. The hidden compartment is hidden because it's behind seemingly normal stonework. Once you see through that stonework, you don't need to make perception checks to realize it's full of fucking snakes.

Generally, once you have a clear line of sight to a target, it can't even hide from you anymore, as per rules. Making them roll perception is admitting the feature is overpowered and nerfing its RAW.

They don't own scouting, but they deserve to be a part of it, not completely blown out of the water. I'll admit imp familiars already fuck over rogues in several ways, and honestly abusing familiars all the time can make anyone groan without any UA content.

File: 20140616123812-lvu-clear_.jpg (116KB, 600x465px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 600x465px

>>51804870
>Just use Voice of the Chain Master if you want to be a recon warlock man, and you can see more than objects.

This has happened with 3 different DMs.

>I send my familiar to go take a look
>The Imp is killed by something, they don't see what it is (One time it was LITERALLY "rocks fall, your Imp dies" because the DM doesn't want us to set up an attack and instead blunder into whatever "super cool" arena-like encounter they made.

With this Invocation you are at least your own character still and your DM (hopefully) won't just kill your ass for messing up their carefully laid railroad tracks, and that's ignoring the usefulness of being able to xray vision stuff.

For example with the Rogue, you could Xray inspect locks for them for traps before they try to pick it and even guide them along to make it easier since I'm assuming it means you can see things similar to this pic.

File: Capture.png (165KB, 515x500px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 515x500px

>>51804908
No.

So
STR 10
DEX 16
CON 14
INT 10
WIS 10
CHA 16

Ok for Half Elf Swashy?

>>51804974
Oh, thank god it was fixed in Errata. I don't remember where I got the idea, probably because it was pretty vague.

I should check that errata to be honest.

>>51804967
This, pretty much.

Fuck familiars.

>>51804956

>What else is 'half of one level' supposed to mean?

It obviates about half of one class feature they get at level one (Perception).

>Making them roll perception is admitting the feature is overpowered and nerfing its RAW.

Or the area is foggy, or they are using camo, or the enemy approaches from outside your line of sight because you're not a beholder.

>>51805006
Familiars can be fun. Granted I've only gotten the chance to use them once or twice.

>>51804976

Yeah, it's okay, just I hope you're not expected to do such things as keeping an eye out for traps.

>>51804870
>the wizard probably has the same Perception modifier as the rogue

not if the rogue expertised it.

>cleric

maybe, but clerics are probably going to have disadvantage on stealth and be shit at scouting ahead.

>Just use Voice of the Chain Master

The imp only has +1 perception and can't see through walls. If you send it ahead it could potentially spring a trap and die.

>>51804967
With this invocation you die instead of the imp dying. You don't come back with a first level spell slot. You are presumably easier to see than a spider that is invisible.

There are legitimately not many foes that see inviz, and not many foes that ferociously attack tiny spiders on the ceiling on sight.

File: alpaca.jpg (363KB, 1130x1194px) Image search: [Google]

363KB, 1130x1194px

What have I done, /5eg/...
>Party strolls into town
>We're all feeling lighthearted, have just leveled up to 6, loaded with gold and jewels from the dungeon we just ransacked.
>Decide that because we're venturing into the mountains next, we'd grab an alpaca in order to get us there, have a new companion, it'll be fun
>Three sessions later, the alpaca has turned into the DMPC, our DM said while we were out he ate a powerful magical item from the pedestal of a tomb we were wandering through when the alpaca got lost
>Now the alpaca is a wizard
>The DM is using him to railroad us, we can't do shit because it's a wizard and has an answer
>Most of the party loves him because they're all new to the game and don't know how hard they're being railroaded
>During a fight with a dragon, it literally pulled out a scroll of disintegrate, which it didn't have before, from it's fur, and blasted it.
>Only me and and the Dwarf fighter can see what's happening, but we can't stop it

I wish I'd never fucking bought that alpaca.

>>51805028
Well Im at least proficient in perception.

>>51805014
Getting perception at all could even be called a level 1 class feature, considering not everyone gets it and rogue gets that couple of extra skills.

Funnily enough, by standard RAW you area beholder. You see in all directions.

>>51805020
They're fun if you don't abuse them. Abusing them includes having them roll initiative in every single fight, do shit constantly and annoy everyone, 'help' action everything to death, not give a fuck about the prospect of your familiar dying, having a 'my familiar always stays ahead' or 'my familiar constantly checks for traps' or anything like that thing set up or...
Well, either way, the proper way to use a familiar is to think of good times to deploy them and only deploy them then, even if it's not the strongest and most metagamey approach.


Even an Imp can't see through walls and past doors and find all the hidden locations and see into chests, though.

File: 1484462664441.jpg (148KB, 491x604px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 491x604px

>>51805042
You know what to do. Open him up and take the powerful magical item, alternatively just kill him.

DM just invited a new player to the game. Cool but the party is looking pretty big and we are in the middle of a dungeon

No problem the DM has him start in town and he can catch up with the rest of us

"Since I dont know where I am ill kidnap someone"

Oh this is gonna be good. Hes also trying to disguise himself as an Alpaca

>>51805037
>not if the rogue expertised it.

Meant cleric. Rogue probably wins at high levels.

>The imp only has +1 perception and can't see through walls.

That's why you use Voice of the Chain Master so you can use its senses.

And if the traps in the dungeon are triggered by an invisible little bug on the ceiling, guess what, you don't need a rogue, a warlock or an imp, you need a bottle of crickets.

>>51804111
Why doesn't this include Paladin with PAM and GWM?

>>51805045
When I use familiars, I keep in mind what my character would do. None of my characters have ever been paranoid enough to have their familiar constantly circling around. One even just has it because she thinks it's cute, and he helps sometimes.

Seriously though, people who go overboard are just annoying.

>>51805040
Tell that to my 3 previous DMs. Enemies are rather good at noticing invisible things if they're messing with their precious railroad.

And speaking of perception since I'm in a bitchy mood now,
>Have a fucking 18 Passive Perception as a Rogue
>This has literally never been used, DM always makes me roll instead of using it for the rare chance that I don't roll well despite having a +8 to Perception rolls

>>51805051
We can't, I want to, but it uses a fucking unavoidable tongue move whenever we do something the DM doesn't like. We tried to rob his girlfriend's characters corpse when she died in the middle of the fight with the dragon I mentioned above, he blasted me off a cliff by whipping me with his tongue. I don't think he even rolled for the attack. And before you judge me for corpse robbing she did the exact same thing to me while I was sleeping, I just wanted my stuff back.

File: 1477213822768.jpg (64KB, 579x506px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 579x506px

>>51805042
You have to accept fate, anon. The alpaca has been possessed by an ancient evil. It's your duty now to put it to peaceful rest, where it can never suffer from this again.

You two are the chosen ones, and must make this sacrifice to sanctify all life before you and prevent alpaca world domination.

Kill it in its sleep. Gag it, restrain its limbs, then gut it in every brutal way possible.

Seal its bloody, magic-tainted corpse into a strongbox and carry it to the highest volcano where you must dispose of it.

>>51805028
Expertise should fix that

File: 1421377239662.jpg (58KB, 298x298px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 298x298px

>>51805082
From the sounds of it, it isn't really your fault the alpaca is shitty. It's the DM, regardless of whether or not the alpaca was there he would've probably tried to pull this shit too. Have you sat down and talked to him about this? Tell him exactly why you fucking hate this alpaca, and that you're thinking about leaving because it just doesn't seem fun.

>>51805042
>>51805058
I see what's happening

>>51804956
>The only thing you might need to use perception on while x-raying is perhaps extremely dim light or a monster trying to blend in to the environment.


Well, a monster trying to oppose a party with x-ray vision from Goo, which can only pierce through objects would probably line tunnels with Moss (or other biomass), fog (fluids don't count as objects), magical or regular darkness (the phantom objects from outlines don't shine)

You can make traps with a range greater than 30 feet, you can get geased hostages to blend in with your troops, you can rely on Illusions, or saturate your fortress with so much Nystul Magical Aura that it fucking blinds you

Rule #1 of Writing Good Magic: Magic creates as many problems as it solves

>>51805059
>That's why you use Voice of the Chain Master so you can use its senses.

So you get to see with its+1 perception? ok then

>And if the traps in the dungeon are triggered by an invisible little bug on the ceiling

I thought imps were small, so I guess you got me there

>>51805107
Speaking of which, would it reveal illusions? Since illusions aren't really objects, you wouldn't see through it.

File: snaggy4.png (335KB, 1362x638px) Image search: [Google]

335KB, 1362x638px

>>51805106
I literally don't know who that guy is.

>>51805045
>considering not everyone gets it and rogue gets that couple of extra skills.

Clerics, paladins, sorcerers, warlocks and wizards seriously, seriously, SERIOUSLY need to get it using their Background. I didn't realize so many people didn't get it.

How fuckin horrifying

>>51805120
Imps are tiny and can shapeshift into a Spider at will.

Not a giant spider or anything, a normal size spider.

>>51805132
I'd suggest talking to the other player who noticed this is BS and finding a new DM then jumping ships. You have a really shitty DM there and nothing you do will fix it.

>>51805124

Not that I can tell, no. Might have to make a ruling on "Illusion that mimicks an objects vs a creature", but there's no reason for it to do something Detect Magic can't do

>>51805045
that's not by raw at all, perception clearly refers to testing for hearing

I see no reason why familiars should not be used to the full extent. At a minimum, roll inits every single fight, help action everything, and have your familiar scout ahead at all times.

I mean, that's what its there for, and now it doesn't even cost XP.

>>51805141
If you go by PHB alone, that basically means all clerics, paladins, sorcerers, warlocks and wizards have to become sailors.

Or, with something else, possibly town watch or something.

It severely limits what your backgrounds can be unless your DM just lets you completely freeform your background.

>>51805147
No, probably not. I just wanted to see if there was anything I could do before that's necessary, because the DM is a friend of a friend so it's gonna be real fucking annoying talking to them after that.

>>51805142

hence "I guess you got me there"

>>51805058

Im this guy and playing right now and didn't even see the other post. The Alpaca thing is a cooinciden. I think hes just trying to be lolrandum

>>51805169
Customizing backgrounds is not a variant rule. Any background can trade one skill for Perception.

>>51805184
My post came before yours, dipshit.

>>51805184
>2 alpaca posts out of nowhere 2 minutes apart
>"lolrandum"
I don't think that means what you think it means

You can have 8 Charisma but still be physically attractive right?

>>51805227
sure. but they're realise you're autistic the moment you start talking.

>>51805156
Because it's annoying.

It's more things for the DM to factor in every fight.
You have to justify advantage every time, as it's possible not all situations would sensibly allow for it.
You have to pretty much not care about your familiar ever dying, and that kind of promotes familiars as sort of 'help bots' rather than another living creature to have fun times with.
You also make it harder for the DM to justify having cases where you don't always know what's up ahead, and it's generally more fun to give players clues (but neither just flat-out telling them everything or keeping it 100% secret).

It helps you as a party, but it makes the game less fun.

>>51805193
If you want to metagame it like that, you might as well help everybody by saying 'Okay, you only get one of your two background proficiencies. Everybody HAS to have perception, because it is the best skill.'

>>51805169

I like city watch (extremely so) but wow didn't know it was just pirate/sailor, have not looked at any other background in years.

>>51805227
You've never seen someone attractive that had bad people-skills?

>>51805246
Can't you technically trade for anything?

>>51805200
>>51805202


I was talking about the new player in my game not you bro calm down. I just felt like venting and the Alpaca thing is one of the strangest coincidences I've ever seen.

>>51805246

Familiar in my arcana cleric a important for ranged Touch healing (and war caster for Cure Wounds of Oportunity) but that's about it.

And I really don't want my DM to start throwing shit around for me to solve with my familiar

>>51805246
>If a character would gain the same proticiency from two different sources, he or she can choose a different proticiency of the same kind (skilI or tool) instead.

Its just the rules.

>metagame

Nothing even 1% meta about a soldier or noble for example picking up perception.

>>51805246

>It's more things for the DM to factor in every fight.

its someone using a truly ancient class feature in the fashion its intended to be used for

>another living creature

Its a spirit, that comes back if it dies, while you and the familiar go away if you die.

>It helps you as a party, but it makes the game less fun.

So does having an overly entitled rogue who wants to be the only person who is allowed to scout, but you don't see me trying to ban rogues, do you?

Exploration is a fucking plank of the game, dude!

So bladelock is viable with the new invocations, right guys?

>>51805278
>the Alpaca thing is one of the strangest coincidences I've ever see
So why get mad when someone else thinks it's funny?

>>51805235
>sure. but they're realise you're autistic the moment you start talking.
>but they're realise you're autistic
kek

>>51805078

>in a fight with a lone enemy
>DM asks everyone to roll perception
>on someone's high roll he reveals another enemy attempting to flank us in the bushes
>next turn, asks for more perception rolls
>someone rolls high
>reveals another enemy trying to move into position from a third angle
>next turn
>asks for perception rolls
no one rolls super high, maybe 15 highest
>DM doesn't reveal anything
>next turn
>asks for perception rolls
>still nothing
>keeps asking for perception rolls every turn
>tfw you realize there were no more enemies and he just keeps asking for rolls to spook you

>>51805374
I've had a dm do similar. Character got ambushed by goblins. Asked her to roll perception 5 times. Only two extra goblins were around.

>>51805374
Sounds like a good DM

>>51805337
Yes, if you also use the Hexblade archetype. I think.

>>51805352

Probably because that doesn't bode well for a serious game. We joke a lot but the core of the game is still functional and I worry about a two year game being derailed

>>51805337
Somewhat. The Smites are allright at lower levels, but the limit of 2 until level 11 really hurts. Getting a ranged smite, a flail with reach and a mace that can knock Huge creatures prone are interesting choices though.

But then again, they are better options in case you go Sorlock, but that would require UA multiclassing, which is pretty much taboo.

Getting +X weapons is good if the GM is stingy, and as it has been discussed, Gaze of Khirad is pretty amazing.

Hexblade patron is an interesting one, buffing the with it's features, but I wouldn't see myself using it, I'd much rather just get a flail with a 3-6-foot chain that can smite.

>>51805169
>If you go by PHB alone, that basically means all clerics, paladins, sorcerers, warlocks and wizards have to become sailors

alternatively you could be an elf. Doesn't variant human get you a skill of your choice?

>>51805296
Soldier makes a bit more sense than a noble, but it generally makes sense that the noble will have the proficiencies they do. You can try to justify it as 'well, the noble REALLY likes hunting, so they constantly hunted out in the wild and they were always on the look-out' but

Really, perception should be banned as a background skill entirely. It's almost completely not in background skills at all in the PHB, save for sailor which has possibly two of the best proficiencies packed into it.

I believe part of the intention of backgrounds is that you aren't just supposed to pick what proficiency you think is best. You pick which seems appropriate for your character or is missing from the party to carve out your niche, rather than jumping on some big 'everybody needs perception for combat' bandwagon.

A good DM will insist you don't need perception all the time, anyway. If you require perception to see the trap and you just set the trap off otherwise, what's the point of having traps? They're not provoking much thought. Or investigation might apply instead.

Only problem there is the DM might still want to ambush, and passive perception is a thing.

>>51805327
>its intended to be used for
It's not really intended to slow down combats, no. They avoided giving it very many combat abilities, only a few.
>It comes back if it dies
And it's fine with you making it go through the agony of dying over and over?
>Overly entitled rogue
Maybe they just want to scout sometimes?

>>51803605

As if a guy could attack anything with melons that big.

File: 1482502201291.jpg (25KB, 480x474px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 480x474px

>>51805246
>metagame
>Taking perception
Are you literally retarded?

If you want Perception you take it. If you don't, you don't. There is nothing else to it. Trying to say "W-WELL IT'S MANDATORY THEN :^(" because your ass doesn't want to admit that there's no reason anyone can't take it if they don't want to is just sad. In fact you can take ANY skill as a background.

Of all the skills to take that can be worked into backgrounds, Perception is literally the easiest. Since you seem to be retarded I'll even do all the work for you.

>Acolyte- Your duties in church included making sure things were clean to the point of perfection. This left you with a very keen eye for detail.
>Charlatan- You've learned to always keep an eye out for guards while working a scam and to look for good targets.
>City Watch- You take your job as "watchman" seriously, keeping an eye for suspicious activity at all times.
>Clan Crafter- An eye for detail is needed for any kind of crafting. An eye for suspicious activity is needed for any crafter with rivals.
>Cloistered Scholar- You can pick out an individual book from a shelf at a glance, and can see other discrepancies just as easily.
>Courtier- You're constantly listening to overhear tasty court rumors and other talk
>Criminal- Do I even need to put anything here?
>Entertainer- Your act needs a sharp eye.
>Folk Hero- Trade Survival, you were a hunter.
>Guild Artisan- See Crafter
>Haunted One- Your experience left you paranoid and always looking for things out of place
>Hermit- You lived somewhere dangerous. Keeping aware was needed to not die.
>Inheritor- You can honestly be any profession with this background so Perception can fit in any number of ways
>Investigator- Why WOULDN'T they have it?
>Knight of the Order- You're a royal guard and as such are trained to keep a keen eye.
Character limit but you get the idea I hope.

>>51805374
And this is why passive perception is a thing.

>>51805497
He's holding up his shield to add Proficiency to his Wisdom save against her Charm spell.

>>51805497
as if her vile demon breasts could sway him from the lord's glorious light.

>>51805508
I think they knew on release that perception is kind of the best skill, yet they didn't put it on EVERY class's proficiency list. Why?

Because they didn't want EVERYONE to have it.

Some of those reasons are hardly enough.
Take entertainer, for example. It's only natural they'll have good performance and acrobatics. 'But', you say, 'my character doesn't want to do an acrobatic performance. He performs magic tricks.' So he takes sleight of hand instead.
What does he need a sharp eye for, so much more than he needs his other proficiencies?
And you could say 'well, he can take acrobatics through his class skills' but at that point you might as well just put perception on all class skills if you're substituting the things you can't get from your class list for background skills.

If you have a good case why your character should get perception instead of one of the other skills that might fit, then sure, but..
The whole purpose of backgrounds existing in the first place is to make characters more of a character, it's not just there to say 'take two proficiencies.'

>>51803605
>HowIMetYourMother.jpg

>>51805587
>n-no perception is too good you're not allowed to have it
>only the rogue is allowed to have perception

>>51805152
>there's no reason for it to do something Detect Magic can't do
Detect Magic doesn't detect illusions?

>>51805628
Every class that gets perception can get it.

Funny that a lot of martial classes get perception, but casters don't. Maybe because the casters are more of the book sorts and focused on their magic rather than the physical world around them and battle tactics and all that.

Don't cry because your super-optimized paladin or wizard or cleric build can't get the best skill in the game as well.

>>51805676
This is quite possibly the weakest argument I've ever seen.
You literally just don't want people to have it.

>>51805558
He has been commanded to spread the Lord's glorious light. It is his duty not to be swayed by those breasts but to sway them. DEUS VULT.

>>51805695
If I didn't want people to have it, I'd ban it from all classes. Maybe make you have to take a feat to get it.

The point is that characters are supposed to have weaknesses. Wizards spend a lot of time studying, and don't have time to get in tune with nature and finding traps and all that.

But you're insisting that your wizard should be able to negate the advantage of being a bit shortsighted in exchange for something actually fitting their background, even if it isn't likely to come up a lot.

Your argument is pretty much 'Book says I can, so why can't I?' to which the answer is the obvious
'You could design the absolute best optimal character for every game if you wanted. That wouldn't make the game fun for everyone.'
And if it's not metagaming in the sense of focusing more on being the best than being flavourful, I don't know what is.

>>51804614
>Their favorite class is Wizard.

I find these players to be the worst, most entitled fucking asses ever.

>>51805327
See: >>51804893
There's a difference between thinking you're the only one allowed to scout and not being able to scout at all because the warlock just trivialized all aspects of it, at least in dungeons.

>>51805807
Bard/Cleric are my most personally fun. What's that make me?

File: ea9wffs9.jpg (40KB, 254x442px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 254x442px

>>51805832
The guy that everyone loves having in their group.

>>51805832
An entitled ass with plausible deniability.

File: Rune Keeper - Sorcerous Origin.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Alright boys, since I like coming here with my homebrew and fixing it based on suggestions/criticisms, I've come back again with something new. My wording tends to be wonky, my writing skills are shit and I tend to make my rough drafts more or less concepts that I improve over time. So typos and balancing issues may vary.

Since I liked the mechanics of Lore Wizard, but hated how disgustingly broken it was and how boring the fluff was, I decided to make a Sorcerous origin for it instead. I'm not the first, and doubt I'm the last, but tell me what you think. Feedback is appreciated.

>>51805558

Those mouth watering tits... aren't fooling anyone Megatron.

>>51805860
>>51805853
Interesting perspectives. Most people are less charitable.

>>51804997
?????????

it literally says under eldritch invocations in your class that when you reach certain warlock levels you gain new invocations. so no it never needed to be fixed you and many others just cant read for shit.

heres a protip: if you think something is stupid OP in the PHB theres a 90% chance theres a rule in place stopping you from doing whatever it is. so you should look up all relevant rules.

dipshit

>>51805489
>I believe part of the intention of backgrounds is that you aren't just supposed to pick what proficiency you think is best.

No, part of the intention is that if you get a redundant skill, you can pick a new skill. Simple.

Hence why its perfectly reasonable to go city watch fighter, etc.

>A good DM will insist you don't need perception all the time, anyway.

Nah

File: Not a variant rule.png (187KB, 156x477px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 156x477px

>>51805762
Too bad faggot.
>BAWW MUH WEAKNESSES
>Conveniently ignoring that you have to trade another proficiency to get it
You are pathetic.

>>51805587
>Some of those reasons are hardly enough.

Too fucking bad! They can get it. Background giving you Perception is less of an optional rule than FEATS and MULTICLASSING. No fiat, no "at the DM's discretion," no "if the backstory warrants it," nope, NOTHING.

>>51805434

Talked with him a bit he seems cool he was just completely new. I guess I was worried from hanging around too many That Guy threads

>>51805873
ultra cringe anime pic

didnt read

>>51805998
I would've been more surprised if no one didn't say something about the picture.

>>51805938
>Wow, I'm trading medicine in order to get Perception, that sure feels like a fair trade

>You might want to tweak some of the features of a background so it BETTER FITS YOUR CHARACTER OR THE CAMPAIGN SETTING
Where does it say 'You might want to tweak some of the features of a background because you want the utmost optimal build?'
Because I've already said if you can justify your character having perception, then it's fine, but what you seem to be insisting here is something that the book isn't saying - that it's fine to take an option not because it develops your character or might be interesting or come up in a way to emphasise that your character is good at X, but just so you won't get ambushed all the time.

>>51805933
So you're saying a DM should require perception rolls constantly?
It'd be kind of lame to always have one skill check, but not the others.

>>51805965
See above. It does not say you should tweak the feature to better suit your metagaming.

File: 1477581744542[1].png (383KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

383KB, 600x600px

>>51805873
>animue

>>51805676
He can, in fact, get the best skill in the game, remember?

The books are your friend. I care less than nothing for your variant rules. If you need justification, think of it as rewarding people to match class and background in a more plausible fashion.

>>51806022
My character is perceptive but not a doctor
Thus I switched Medicine for Perception
Wow that was hard.

And why are you acting like Perception is some kind of game-breaking skill? Because it's not.

File: internet argument.png (365KB, 677x443px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 677x443px

>>51806022
>So you're saying a DM should require perception rolls constantly?

No, but its the skill that keeps you from being kill by traps (I assume) and to avoid surprise. So it is broadly useful in a way nothing else is. I would probably have made it a kind of saving throw, not a "skill."

File: Lore Wizard example.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>51805913
Well, I probably just missed that part. Sheesh, no need to be so angry about me missing something. A human error, I'd say.

>>51805873
I'm not sure. I'd think the Augmented Casting would be better just as additional Metamagic options for sorcerer, if you want to have them on a sorcerer.

And I don't really get what's so rune keeper-y about modifying spells. They are rune KEEPERS, that doesn't sound like the most inventive of people to be honest.

There's my less-broken lore wizard on the pdf related.

>>51805645
It just tells you if something is magic or not. Sure, illusions will probably light up like a lighthouse in the middle of the night, but so would spellcasters and magic items of various types. So, you wouldn't know that you were looking at an illusion with detect magic unless you've already beat the will save.

>>51806022
>utmost optimal build?

Woah man, the game allows you a +10 to 15 % chance to succeed at a given task that every one else is going to try to suceed at anyway, 5e most broken

File: 5e proficiencies background.png (233KB, 473x227px) Image search: [Google]

233KB, 473x227px

>>51806022
>It does not say you should tweak the feature to better suit your metagaming.

No tweaking is involved.
No customization is involved.
No hint of fitting it to my character is involved.

Totally different paragraph.

>>51806059
While I agree, they should've just been metamagic options, for now I just wanted to see how it worked as a origin feature instead.

I went with Rune Keepers because it sounded cool, and was mentioned in the warlock invocations but not outside of it(as far as I'm aware).

File: Capture.png (94KB, 299x157px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 299x157px

>>51806058
>>So you're saying a DM should require perception rolls constantly?
>I would probably have made it a kind of saving throw, not a "skill."

Man if only there was some kind of "spell save DC" for Perception so you wouldn't constantly have to roll it in the rules.

Maybe 10+your Prof mod would work?

>>51806110
Yeah, I prefer that rule.

>>51806118
The rule that literally already exists?

>>51806058
Well, I think in any case as the DM it's best to have a broad range of skills involved without it seeming unnatural.

It really should've been a save.

>>51806040
It sounds more like 'rewarding people who know about the game and don't care about having skills that match their character concept, but rather having skills that make their character better in a fight'. It's true, it's matching more combative backgrounds to adventurers who combat, but.

>>51806083
And that's why you don't need to scrounge for perception all the time, and can suck up and have actually flavourful skills instead, because not having perception proficiency isn't going to cause your character to just die.

>>51806089
This only applies to proficiencies that you get beyond level 1. I don't think it's intended that you should be able to select a proficiency you already have just to turn it into an 'any proficiency'. If, for example, you take a warlock feature that gives you persuasion and deception proficiency at level 2, you can then swap one of those proficiencies for something else.

Unless you mean the top bit, which is just saying what the background is intended to do.

File: rly makes dog think.jpg (147KB, 600x534px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 600x534px

>>51806130
Yes, that one.

>>51806110
That's not really the point being conveyed.

A combat skill such as 'to avoid being snuck up upon' should be a save, not part of a skill proficiency.

You can't get skill proficiency in initiative, normally, because it's a fucking combat stat.
Perception is sort of a hybrid combat non-combat stat which should never have been.

>>51804828
Lighting, music; music helps focus, and lighting is a passive reminder that you're in a dark dungeon, or whatever. It's especially helpful if you have a dimmer light you can switch around.

Also just ask them outright if everyone would be okay trying to get more in character; make sure all the players are on the same page.

>>51806133
>This only applies to proficiencies that you get beyond level 1
nowhere is that implied

>>51806168
"Being snuck up on" uses passive perception.

Passive Perception is essentially a save DC that the one sneaking has to beat.

This is designed explicitly so the one doing the sneaking is the one who rolls so it's 1- not going to give away to the party (or their victim) that they're getting snuck and 2- requires less rolls total.

Is this really that hard for people to understand?

>>51806133
>It sounds more like 'rewarding people who know about the game and don't care about having skills that match their character concept

Unfortunately you're wrong, since the easiest way to get a free anyskill is to match class to background, resulting in a pretty plausible character concept.

>This only applies to proficiencies that you get beyond level 1.

Your shit tier homebrew is of literally no interest to me or anyone here. Try again, this time with an actual rule fro the book, not something you made up on the spot to try to win an argument.

>I don't think it's intended that you should be able to select a proficiency you already have just to turn it into an 'any proficiency'.

It is most certainly intended that and Noble + Paladin, Sage + Wizard be a good choice and not shittier than being Pirate Paladin or Pirate Wizard.

>>51806231
Not the guy you're responding to, but while I prefer passive inits and passive perception, save vs ambush and save vs trap seems totally reasonable to me. Falling into an ambush can easily mean you die, at least as often as any other kind of save.

Quicker is better, of course.

>>51806215
It's common sense that when you have an option of different proficiencies, you should choose a different option instead of insisting you take the one that clashes with another proficiency just to turn it into 'any proficiency'.

If your background would give you a proficiency your class already has, you can simply take a different class proficiency with the proficiency it'd overlap with.

I tried to find a sage advice mention of the RAI, but I think the question's so dumb nobody would have ever have asked it. It's clearly intended for things such as if your class (Say, assassin) gives you disguise kit proficiency and you already have disguise kit proficiency from a background.

Of course, you can say 'But RAW you could technically abuse this!' but then you have to realize you might as well play a netfighting rogue because I believe that's still raw.

>>51806231
Yes, but why is a save based off of a skill you can use skill proficiency to get a boost to?
That's what's being asked here. You can't get proficiency in initiative or in a save with a skill proficiency.

>>51806260
>passive inits

Unf, definitely not, too many +2's and -1 going around, always breaking ties

>>51806351
its common sense that you shouldn't assume your shit tier homebrew is in effect. Read the fuckin rules. No one cares about your shitty homebrew.

Example: One option for a soldier is to have been a medic. Fighter with Soldier -> medic subbackground -> medicine.

> I think the question's so dumb nobody would have ever have asked it.

The fact that you are triggered is not an argument.

>'But RAW you could technically abuse this!'

There is not the slightest element suggesting its a corner case not not fully intended.

Remember: no one cares about your shitty homebrew. You lose.

>>51806233
'I have the option between proficiency A and proficiency B and proficiency C, but I already have proficiency A. So therefore I'm going to take proficiency A which then gives me proficiency D.'

Stop following RAW like it's a code of absolute, unchangable rules. The DM is there to call you out on your bullshit once you start pulling bullshit out of your ass, and that's clearly bullshit.

>>51806375
I don't really see how passive inits is a big deal compared to passive perception, makes the game go a lot faster.

Artificer Skills: Choose three from Arcana, Deception, History, Investigation, Medicine, Nature, Religion, Sleight of Hand
Clan Crafter- Skill Proficiencies. History, Insight

>Take History as an Artificer skill. You get it with Crafter. You can thus pick one Skill.

Cleric Skills: Choose two from History, Insight, Medicine, Persuasion, and Religion
Acolyte Skill Proficiencies. Insight, Religion

>Doubling up on Insight OR religion gives up to 2 free skills.

Monk Skills: Choose two from Acrobatics, Athletics, History, Insight, Religion, and Stealth
Hermit Skill Proficiencies. Medicine, Religion

>Religion doubles up

Paladin Skills: Choose two from Athletics, Insight, Intimidation, Medicine, Persuasion, and Religion
Noble Skill Proficiencies. History, Persuasion

>Persuasion doubles up

Sorcerer Skills: Choose two from Arcana, Deception, Insight, Intimidation, Persuasion, and Religion
Hermit Skill Proficiencies. Medicine, Religion

>Religion doubles up

Warlock Skills: Choose two skills from Arcana, Deception, History, Intimidation, Investigation, Nature, and Religion
Charlatan Skill Proficiencies. Deception, Sleight of Hand

>Deception doubles up

Wizard Skills: Choose two from Arcana, History, Insight, Investigation, Medicine, and Religion
Sage Skill Proficiencies. Arcana, History

>Arcana and History both double up


Literally every class can get at least one free skill using the recommended backgrounds, and this is assuming you're being intentionally obtuse and saying you're not allowed to use the NON VARIANT "Customizing Background" rule.

>>51806046
I mean, it's fine to not have perception if you have alert, which is my favorite feat anyway.

Not having alert or perception on a squishy is a recipe for SURPRISE ROUND oops you're dead.

>>51806434
If you ever DMed a game, I would acknowledge that you have no sense of 'right' and 'wrong' but only 'this is exactly what the rules say', so I would go around punching people in the face with a net for 1d4+STR damage with possible sneak attack and other ranged weapon bonuses which then also restrains the enemy because the rules say I can. Because, I mean, that's not retarded, is it?
Don't even get started on all the RAW ways to abuse high level spells that any actualy sane DM would pause to realize need slight adjustment to avoid breaking the game.

>>51806476
Yes, you're free to house rule as you please. Though as far as "bullshit" goes this is hardly as big of a deal as you seem to think

>>51806476

Class is listed before background for a reason, DILLWEED! In this case, the reason is so you don't have to be Popeye the Sailor Paladin.

>Stop following RAW like it's a code of absolute, unchangable rules

RAI + RAW trumps your precious feewingz, DILLWEED. Just in case you don't get the skill you want in the "Proficiencies" section, you can customize it later on. That's right: if you miss the opportunity the first time, you still have another opportunity to get the skill you want the second time.

>The DM is there to call you out on your bullshit once you start pulling bullshit out of your ass, and that's clearly bullshit.

Ya got nothin. DILLWEED.

>>51806537
It's not a big deal, but it's intentionally abusing something that clearly isn't designed for it, much like how you can abuse improvized weapon rules to pull some funky melee ranged attack bullshit.

>>51806556
I bet you do rolling for stats (If you're ever stupid enough to roll, but it's an option in the book) before choosing class, even though that's clearly retarded.
There isn't any set required sequence to creating a character. You can choose the background and then the class if you wish.

>RAI
Where's the RAI? That's what I've been trying to find, because while you have RAW, I can't find anything on RAI.

>>51806351
>Yes, but why is a save based off of a skill you can use skill proficiency to get a boost to?
That's what's being asked here. You can't get proficiency in initiative or in a save with a skill proficiency.

Save DC is 8+Caster Mod+PROFICIENCY.

Is there a reason that poison is effectively useless against adventures and basically anyone that's not a level 1 commoner?

>>51806529
I've been a DM for 20 years, and if there's one thing that never ceases to amuse me, its entitlement mentality players like yourself who feel they have the right to demand random ass DMs adopt their precious homebrew, or else they're a "dick" or whatever.

>I would go around punching people in the face with a net for 1d4+STR damage with possible sneak attack and other ranged weapon bonuses which then also restrains the enemy because the rules say I can

Wrong. You are bleating over people not liking your shit tier homebrews, and then you bring up a hypothetical example of "that's like you accepting a homebrew that allows nets to do damage and be used as a melee weapon!"

No. If I'm going to do a homebrew, its gonna be my homebrew, not an entitlement mentality player.

The only tortured reading that permits your net retardation is the "DM's option" clause under improvised weapons, try again.

>Don't even get started on all the RAW ways to abuse high level spells that any actualy sane DM would pause to realize need slight adjustment to avoid breaking the game.

All this tantrumming over the idea that people who stand guard and stay alert for a living might be as perceptive as a guy who works on a ship, even though the book twice reaffirming it.

>>51804018
>What would be the appropriate roll to see if it misses?
My eyes. It doesn't hit, because mage hand cannot attack. You don't use holy water on a creature by pouring the vial on them. You hurl the vial or splash the contents. It's forceful. The mage hand cannot do forceful. If you just need to put down some holy water to keep some flameskulls from reviving, Mage Hand can probably handle that task.

I can't be assed to link everyone this applies to.

>>51806488

Yeah, but it subtracts a lot of gameplay. Bards can't cutting words, clerics can't guidance, sentinel shield, and alert, and Cat's Grace, and some ranger features

I like Initiative as it stands

File: dillweed.jpg (19KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 300x300px

>>51806612
>I bet you do rolling for stats

Desperate projection.

>There isn't any set required sequence to creating a character

And you are demanding houserules to disallow something that is allowed twice in a row.

>Where's the RAI? That's what I've been trying to find

The same page lists, TWICE, how you can get a different skill. Deal with it, DILLWEED!

>>51806508
I get that getting a different skill if one you already have is forced on you and not your choice, but willfully choosing skills to overlap so you get proficiency outside your class is pretty dumb.

>>51806641
>skill yo
because monsters use poison and the designers didn't want to insta-kill PCs?

>>51806641
Um... poison is stupendously powerful. Poison is so powerful the official rule is "totally the DM's discretion whether you can harvest poison and if so how many times, but the rules are there if the DM wishes to allow it."

By RAW you can start with almost unlimited uses of 3d6 save for half poison for all your arrows, darts, crossbow bolts, etc., and before long you can get 7d6 save for half wyvern venom. I think that's just a CR 5 monster.

>>51806667
>homebrew
>homebrew
Just calling things you don't like about the RAW 'homebrew' isn't going to help you.
Netfighting is entirely RAW. A net is a ranged weapon, allowing you to take a melee weapon attack with it as per rules for improvized attacks. However, the fact it does not have the 'ammunition' property means it's not even an improvized melee weapon. It's a ranged weapon, so it triggers sneak attack, and nothing says its special property doesn't still trigger. What's more awkward is that if you tried to use a net normally by using a ranged attack with it you'd always have disadvantage without a feat, yet here you don't get disadvantage.

>All this tantrumming over the idea that people who stand guard and stay alert for a living might be as perceptive as a guy who works on a ship
Despite all the times I said that would be okay, because that's actually justified in the background.

>>51806695
>Desperate projection
You cut half the sentence off to make it sound better.
The statement isn't that 'You do rolling for stats' but if you could read and extrapolate a bit more than what you read in text, 'if you rolled for stats, you would roll it before you chose a class'.

>The RAW says this, so it's RAI
Holy fuck what are you even saying.

>>51806612
>Where's the RAI?

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?391859-Race-amp-background-give-same-skill-proficiency

http://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/19790/what-happens-if-i-get-the-same-skill-from-both-my-background-and-my-class

https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/3y8y7u/background_proficiencies_class_proficiencies_5e/

http://engl393-dnd5th.wikia.com/wiki/Backgrounds

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?358614-duplicate-proficiency

http://dnd.wizards.com/products/tabletop/players-basic-rules
>If a character would gain the same proficiency from two different sources, he or she can choose a different proficiency of the same kind (skill or tool) instead.

You are LITERALLY arguing that the rules listed in MULTIPLE ARES OF THE PHB are wrong and not "RAI".

File: diIIweed.jpg (157KB, 755x755px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 755x755px

>>51806742

>You cut half the sentence off to make it sound better.

"I don't like your homebrew, therefore you roll for stats" is a pretty bad insult, to be honest, DILLWEED.

>Holy fuck what are you even saying.

It says, explicitly, that you can trade out skills, in case you missed it, at the DM's option.

Flavor justification: you were a scout. Wow, that is hard, DILLWEED.

>>51806742
>comparing improvised weapon bullshit with gaining a skill
You really like your false equivalencies don't you?

>>51806787
>at the DM's option

Look at >>51805938.
Now look at >>51806089.

Nowhere does it say "At the DMs option".

>>51805881
my nigga.

File: 1406737589139.jpg (89KB, 622x626px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 622x626px

>>51806787
Do I have to spell everything out in perfect text so you don't misinterpret it as an insult, or are you just baiting that hard?

I don't believe anyone who actually browses here thinks that everything said in the book, the perfect RAW, translates into perfect RAI. This can only be the emergence of bait.

>>51806798
It's only to try to explain the difference between RAW and RAI, but I don't think they get it.

>>51806846
There is nothing to "Interpret". The rules are both clearly written and put in two distinct areas of the PHB, both of which are consistent.

It's a clearly defined rule. RAW is RAI.

WELP
Time to abandon thread
See you in a few hours after things have cooled down

File: dilIweed.jpg (16KB, 240x240px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 240x240px

>>51806846
>If you're ever stupid enough to roll, but it's an option in the book) before choosing class, even though that's clearly retarded.

Sorry, I guess in the planet of the DILLWEEDS, calling people stupid and retarded are compliments.

>I don't believe anyone who actually browses here thinks that everything said in the book, the perfect RAW, translates into perfect RAI.

Wasn't even 0.0001% arguing that. Instead, it has been pointed out repeatedly that the same page lists not one but TWO ways to get a different proficiency -- one is by a background with redundant skills, one is by choosing to customize it, and you'd know better if DILLWEEDS read books. But they don't.

So I want to run a dungeon in which kobolds, goblins, orcs, hobgoblins, gnolls, and bugbears are medium tier monsters, not low tier monsters.

For orcs and hobgoblins this is easy: they have a lot of deity centric, mid tier orcs I can use, and for hobbos, I wanted to have it be styled as training grounds for the Academy of Destruction, so lots of Hobgoblin Devastators. For gnolls, it'll be more of a conventional encounter with a lot of gnolls acting as warlords, plus the higher tier flind and jackal demon thingy, and some chaff. Kobolds, well kobold sorcs are decent, if weak, plus guard drakes perhaps.

But what should I do for souped up gobbos and bugbears?

>>51806955
Are the Goblinoids, Gnolls, and Orcs working together?

>>51806889
For all we know those rules are there to explain what happens if you gain a proficiency you already have later down the line.
It does not, however, clarify if this is supposed to hold true for purposefully choosing options that gain you extra skills.

There is nothing saying you can take proficiency in something you already have on purpose when you have a choice of proficiencies. There is nothing saying you can't, either. That's what this really relies on, and while the RAW would seem to allow it a bit of critical judgement should say that it seems odd, because it combines two things at character creation that give certain skills to give you access to other skills you otherwise could never have gotten, like some sort of 'match-up reward program'.

And then this faggot comes along talking about their free skill proficiency reward program and calling it 'homebrew' if you don't allow it.

Since there's no sage advice, the logical solution is to 'ask your DM'. That's what the RAI is - whatever the DM says.

Just to be clear, the background section explicitly states that you can choose any two skills you like and that the backgrounds given are just examples.

I don't understand what this argument is even about.

Can't you just work with your DM and create your own background, and pick whichever 2 skills etc. you like?

>>51805446
>UA multiclassing, which is pretty much tab

Is that why Hexblade/Paladin and Hexblade/Sorceror seem so strong?

Heck, those super-smite invocations might make classing into Paladin redundant outside of being able to play harder for Charisma due to strength dumps.

>>51807051
>To customize a background, you can replace one feature with any other one
>choose any two skills...
>phb 125
Seems pretty cut and dried dude

>>51803637
Drow and Wood elf are kinda tied behind Aquatic elf.

>>51807096
Yes, but some GMs prefer the in the book stuff to stop people from custom making their own super-backgrounds.

Of course, then everyone seems to end up being a sailor.

>>51807097
Yea, that's why they're so strong. UA have been designed with Monoclassing in mind. Multiclassing with them just breaks the game really hard.

>>51807051
>Choose ANY two skills
>Nowhere does it say "From your Class skills"
Now let's assume that you decide to say that anyways, just because of RAI shenanigans. Maybe you've got a learning disability where you can't read or something. BUT WAIT, WHAT'S THIS?? >>51805938
HOLY TITS, IT'S ALMOST AS IF IT'S INTENDED BY THE VERY RULES THAT YOU CAN TAKE ANY TWO SKILLS YOU WANT FOR A CHARACTER.

I'm done trying to argue that the rules written in the rulebook are somehow not "actual rules"

>>51806071
It also tells you which school of magic is being used, which is a big hint.

>>51806529
>I would go around punching people in the face with a net for 1d4+STR damage with possible sneak attack and other ranged weapon bonuses

nets are ranged weapons with a range of 5/15.

Meaning outside the 5 foot range they have disadvantage because it's outside the first range increment, and inside the 5 foot range they still have disadvantage because all ranged weapons are disadvantaged in melee. Nets also do 0 damage RAW. I don't know if you can add Sneak Attack damage to an attack that does 0, but before that even becomes a question you have to cancel out the disadvantage somehow, either using feats or only attacking restrained targets or something.

>>51804018
More like a Perception and a Sleight of hand check with low DCs to drop the vial from above.

>>51806680

Holy Water only hurts fiends and undead. you really think the damage comes from the force of the vial breaking, and not the properties of the holy water itself? If that was the case, it should deal the same damage to humans, right?

>>51805676
A wizard stands a good chance of choosing to be a high elf, which gets them perception proficiency.

Is there a list of all the variant half-elf sub races? What would a half-drow even look like?

>>51806612

how is choosing class after rolling more stupid than choosing class before rolling?

>thread has devolved into trolls trolling other trolls
I'm playing a Blade Pact Hexblade Warlock. His pact weapon is the black blade he made a pact with. It's a rapier. What should I name it? Currently thinking of just going with Penetrator for the Demons Souls reference, but it might be too lewd.

>>51807182
Page 148 of PHB
"If a characler uses a ranged weapon to make a melee attack, or throws a melee weapon that does not have the thrown property, it also deals 1d4 damage."

Specific damage overrides the weapon's damage. Since it now deals damage, it can now sneak attack. Also, since it's a melee weapon attack, it doesn't have disadvantage at 5ft.

I've never played a Warlock before but kind of want to because I love the concept behind them. How can I effectively and usefully play one without having resorting to spamming eldritch blast?

>>51807278
The idea is choosing class before rolling is the more stupid one.

>>51807282
Throw the word into Google translator and cycle through languages until you get something that sounds nothing like that word and is also a language you are sure no one at the table understands.

>>51807282
Black Stinger
Scorpion
Longshadow
Black Shaft

>>51807282
Needle
Also, I never realized you can put spoilers inside spoilers. Neat.

>>51807352
The new UA gives some nice damage to bladelocks, and if you're creative, you can do things with your Familiar.

Why should i play in the Adventurer's League? Seems like a very shallow fast food style D&D for people that can't find groups.

>>51803605
I want to fuck that snake.

>>51807352
EB spam is always going to be the best way to warlock in an objective sense. You can probably still be pretty handy with blade pact and some of the new goodies that got in the last Unearthed Arcana.

>>51807352
Warlocks have a huge range of possible utility and flavour. The first thing you need to do is decide what kind of Warlock you want to be.

However, Eldritch Blast is ultimately the combat fallback for a reason and you'll probably find yourself using that in combat eventually. If it's too distasteful you can still use the other cantrips instead.

>>51805762
>And if it's not metagaming in the sense of focusing more on being the best than being flavourful, I don't know what is.
>I don't know what metagaming is.
Clearly.

>>51807413
You answered your own question.

>>51807346

you get 1d4 damage, but it doesn't say anything about losing the disadvantage you get for using a weapon in melee.

>>51807424
If you're going bladelock, it's to have another body in the fray, harassing enemy ranged attackers and assisting your rogue in sneak attacks.

The problem isn't that EB is the strongest attack - that's by design. It's that until now, bladelocks lost too much damage for the benefits of being in melee to compensate, and also were too squishy to survive. The new UA helps address those concerns, letting warlocks be truly viable gishes.

>>51805821
30' range probably doesn't trivialize stealth and scouting, even in a dungeon. It'll often be useful in place of having good perception, but it doesn't cover passive perception or distances more than 30'.

Doesn't the very first trainer module have a dungeon with a corridor more than 30' long with hidden arrow slits at the end? With goblins watching?

How accurate is the Forgotten Realms wikia? Some things look very outdated or just plain wrong.

>>51807359

well then the guy I quoted said it backward, I guess

>>51807475
Melee weapon attacks don't have disadvantage in melee.

Page 195, disadvantage is only if it's a ranged attack, not if it's an attack with a ranged weapon.

>>51807475

It's being used as a melee weapon, there is no disadvantage on it. Just like if he decided to throw his short sword within 5ft it would be at a disadvantage because it's being considered a ranged weapon for the attack.

>>51807522
>>51807539
Why do you even bother arguing with this guy? You won't convince him to use the RAI, he won't convince anybody to use his dumbass rules lawyering. Doesn't seem to be a point to this discussion.

>>51805028
He gets proficiency in Perception and i'm sure he can just slap on expertise on it.

>>51806168
It's okay to use ability checks in combat. You don't get initiative proficiency because it's too narrow to include as a skill. You could get it from something more narrow though.

>>51807485
Unfortunately, I think it would. I'm running one of the modules and the party is currently going through a very cool dungeon, which would have many of its features become pointless with at-will 30ft x-ray vision. Traps? Forget about them. Secret chute in the wall? One glance is enough to find it. The expectation of surprise behind each door? Gone and replaced by boringness and an ever ready party. It's silly how good the invocation is and now that I consider it, I would never allow it without severe nerfing. Probably limit it to Cha mod uses per day.

>>51807582

He could do that, and he'll be about as good as someone who actually puts any points into that ability score, with standard proficency,

Or he could put expertise in skills he'll actually be good at, like Deception, Persuasion, Stealth and Sleight of Hand and hope he isn't playing for a bad DM.

>>51807663
>High level Swashbuckler with Expertise in Perform, Persuassion and Deception.

Be the most shit-eating swordsman to ever have lived and annoy your enemies to death with Yo Moma jokes.

>>51806710
Alternatively: The point of backgrounds is to get skills outside of your class

>>51807713
Guy I play with took a rogue level just to be better at dancing once.

>>51807097
Hex-blade/Stone sorc is pretty bullshit for a multiclass.

Basically only use Con and Cha for everything.
Pick up PAM while you are at it.

>>51807282
Long Dong the blade of Long John.

>>51807539
This is also technically wrong.

It's not being used as a melee weapon.
It's a ranged weapon being used to make a melee weapon attack.

And that fucks things up.

>>51807522
>>51807539

if it's considered a melee attack and it doesn't have finesse then still no sneak attack

>>51807850
His shitty logic is that it is still a ranged weapon even when hitting someone over the head with it. Yes that is how retarded the person you arguing with is. As that other guy said you really should just drop it.

>>51807245
I think the ability to hit something comes from the force of the throw. I think if you opened a vial a holy water and poured it out it would never hit any fiend or undead, but you might get a little backsplash on your boots. I also think you might be pulling my leg.

>>51807282
Black March is a good reference, if you want something like that. Beats "Names a porn star might use" anyway.

Should I forget Chromatic Orb by the time I'm learning Blight and Disintegrate?

>>51807766

Just hosted a Footloose one shot with a team full of people who all had at least one level in bard.

Paladin 6 Bard 1 (Had an Axe - like the guitar)
Bard 7 (Drums Sticks / Magic Precussion Wands were his magic focus)
Valor Bard 7 (Lead Singer)
Storm Sorcerer 5 Bard 2 (Lights and Pyrotecnics)

Our party has like, 4 front liners.
And 3 of them are elves.
After being forever a gm someone is going to continue the campaign.
I wish to play a Half-Orc, perhaps a full blooded Orc. But I wanted to do something other than just going as a melee frontliner.

Any curious build with the Half-Orc/Orc stats for Clerics, casters or more subtle characters?

>>51808088

If you fireball yourself as a Wild Magic Sorcerer, you'll survive the blast...

Lorewise, Orc casters are typical Shamans or Druids

>>51808117
>Shamans

By which I mean a type of cleric.

Aditionally, as a half orc druid, you can arguably (talk to your dm) hold onto your Wild Shape a little while longer, and take an extra die on a crit.

Furthermore, by going half orc, prioritize those mental stats during point buy, and your orc racials give you a nice cushion to your physical stats that make sure you're never bad at anything while in between wild shapes.

Not good either, but at some point, fuck optimization. Moon Druids don't need max wisdom that much anyway, since they can't cast in wild shape anyway

>>51808088
Why not become a wolf barbarian and give everyone sweet, sweet advantage?

There isn't really that many things you can do with half-orc onto cleric, but at the very least you can use it to give yourself 15 strength for plate armour and use the stats you didn't put into making strength high into other important stats.

>>51808088
Unfortunately, practically all of the racial features are melee-oriented. But there's a lot you can do with that, like an interesting bashy gish. The UA hexblade could work very well with half-orc features, and various paladin oaths offer interesting roleplaying opportunities.

>>51808257
>>51808088
Oh, yeah, you could pick up booming blade / green flame blade for melee clericage, even if you only use it instead of cantrip attacks.


If you want to not be on the front lines, don't pick a race that only benefits front liners unless you can convince your DM to give some of those bonuses to ranged attacks.

>>51807904

You think the act of pouring something on someone is impossible? And you think it's still impossible when you have the option of using a magic spectral hand to pour from 30 ft away while the target is occupied fighting someone else?

Do elaborate.

>>51808088

Let's see, Half Orc gives
>STR
>CON
>Crits
>Rage survival
>Prof in a CHA skill

The most casty thing I can see you doing here is Paladin

A 16, 14, 8, 10, 12, 14 array is actually pretty great.

Get Polearm Master and you can even stay (a little bit) away from the direct frontline.

>>51807607
It's a limited form of unlimited clairvoyance. (I know what I just said, bear with me.) It probably needs to be a higher level, like Arcane Eye at will is.

>>51804047
You are pouring an object not aiming an attack so the enemy would make a dexterity save to avoid it.

The idea being that the action is irrelevant to if the enemy is there or not.

>>51808407

Not him, but I still think it's a magic improvised weapon attack

Adds shit for use to what is already a cantrip about as useful as a ten foot pole

>>51807987
Do you want to use it in a spell slot between 1 and blight? Y/N

I'm joining a game with a party that consists of a Beast Master Ranger, Bear Totem Barbarian, Gunslinger Fighter, a Pugilist (from DMsguild), a Fiendlock, and a Mystic. What kind of class should I play that would most benefit the party?

File: Khadgar-from-Warcraftmovie_Tumblr-cropped.jpg (1MB, 1280x1440px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1280x1440px

I'm playing a level 4 Human (variant) Arcane Trickster Rogue that has the Ritual Caster and the Magic Initiate feats.

He's a Mage School dropout that roamed the countryside disguised as a great and powerful wizard and he'd con his way into advising small nobles and lords of villages. Usually, the gig is to dazzle the populace, gain the ear of the noble, invent a conspiracy or assassination plot, grandstand the forces against the noble which simultaneously flatters them, and then rob their coffers and make out into the night.

That's the backstory at least.

I have no real idea how to progress the character mechanically though. I'd like him to be a better caster, and the rogue progression just doesn't seem to appeal to me since he tries to avoid melee combat at all costs.

Do I start branching out towards Eldritch Knight?

Thank you for all the Half-Orc ideas, I'll look into the Hexblade, the Cleric suggestions and the Paladin suggestions as well.