/5eg/ D&D Fifth Edition General

http://www.strawpoll.me/12498055

Got a game I need to be ready for in five hours, and I have just one question for you guys.

Using just regular page 150 items, how many different ways can I fuck with PC's using a Thief antagonist?

I have some ideas of my own (pocketsand CON save VS Blindness for one round and the like) but I want to make this as interesting as I can for them, supposed to be a tough, but wacky and lighthearted encounter

>>52114794
Ball Bearings for maximum three stooges slipping and sliding.

>>52114735
Good to see someone else voted Knight. If I'm playing a Fighter, I want to be a big motherfucker in big armour with a big shield.

I wanna use the Caves of Chaos as a dungeon for 5-10 or thereabout PCs; my players NEVER go into any remotely important sounding dungeon willingly.

Is there any kind of spellcaster or other character archetype that is somewhere around CR 4 that bugbears would fit? They're one of the few kinds of famous humanoids that don't have a higher tier variant.

I don't mind a custom option or one based off PCs, but I can't think of anything that really fits.

Any advice on how to play minions in combat? I have a tough time playing them to be intelligent beings; they just charge the PCs and attack the thing nearest to them until they die

Thinking of playing a Stone Sorcerer as a 4e Swordmage.

Now if I plan to mostly quicken GFB and BB with defensive spells and buffs, what are the best choices to look at for spells?

Also would multiclassing into something else for Medium Armour be a good idea if I plan to go Dexterity focus? I was thinking Fighter for Action Surge and a Fighting Style.

>>52114925
Have them utilize tactics like using cover, flanking. Describe them as working together in different ways as well, i.e "The two kobolds close in on you, fighting in tandem. The one on the left feints towards your chest, while the one on your right slashes at your ankles."

Have dudes run away when shit gets bad or when they get injured or have some enemies attempt to help their allies. Things like this make the enemies seem smart and not jsut like piles of hit points.

File: hqdefault.jpg (12KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 480x360px

>>52114794
>Sh-SHAAAA

>>52114877
Barbarogue? Arcane Trickster? Shadow Monk? I mean their whole thing is they're sneaky and big, and also lazy. Maybe some kind of weird druid or a War/Trickery cleric of Hruggek?

Man... medium armour seems kinda lousy.

>>52115065

It's...it's almost like he's throwing a sand-like substance. Possibly contained in a small pouch sewn into the side of his pantaloons.

Pantaloon pouch silicon! Fuck, it just rolls off the tongue.

>>52112896
Yeah I can see your point about Domino, in Dishonored it lets you eliminate a captain of the guard and his entourage (you can eventually target 4 NPCs) with a single sleep dart.

Really I just want to figure out a way to nerf Dimension Door enough that you can use it almost immediately, the Outsider seems to really enjoy handing out short-range teleportation powers as soon as he gives someone a Mark.

>>52115132
How so? Obviously on someone with Heavy Armour that's preferred but unless you have a +5 DEX modifier Medium Armour's going to be better.

Got some chargen going on tonight with my normie brother because I'm trying to find more stuff to do with him, any tips for making this as rules-lite as possible for him?

>>52115181
I think you're looking for Misty Step.

>>52115231
Starter Set rules is only a few pages.

File: 1446867393534.png (2MB, 1408x1800px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1408x1800px

To the Darkest Dungeon DM from last thread.

>>52108401
>Abomination
Moon Druid with a custom wildshape

>Antiquarian
Mastermind Rogue (because it's just as useless in combat as an Antiquarian).

>Arbalest
Battlemaster Fighter w/ sharpshooter is a good idea, but maybe Hunter Ranger w/ sharpshooter for Hunter's Mark and Volley (both features I personally use quite bit in DD).

>Bounty Hunter
Fighter/Rogue makes sense. Look up some ideas to implement/improve net and hook use.

>Crusader
Any beatface Paladin oath (Crusade and Vengeance being the most obvious).

>Grave Robber
Rogue Assassin works great.

>Hellion
Barbarian Berserker also works great.

>Highwayman
Try Champion Fighter for this. Highwayman is just a high-crit beatstick in most cases, and his health is usually pretty decent.

>Hound Master
BM Ranger with a club.

>Jester
Straight Valor Bard.

>Leper
I'm tempted to say Paladin. He's a pretty religious guy, but I guess that doesn't need to reflect on his class.

>Man-At-Arms
War Cleric, my man.

>Occultist
GOO Tomelock. Lots of area control spells, too.

>Plague Doctor
Alchificer is perfect.

>Vestal
Light Cleric seems breddy good.

For general suggestions, look up some systems to make insanity a thing.
Toss around curios and reward them for sticking their necks out with the odd stat improvement and the like.
Magic Items should maybe be two sided, but not HEAVILY so.
If you trust them, make combat always ~1/2CR too high.
Exploration should be just as interesting as fighting, so really brush up on your purple prose and attention to detail.

>my groups I play with irl are great but they're kinda inconsistent and I have to DM
>decide to check out roll20
>see some games that look okay
>read other players' applications
Never mind.

>>52114876
Isn't Paladin a better class if you want to be a protector of others?

>>52115142
jokes on you, it was itching powder

File: Origami Butterfly-00058.jpg (36KB, 700x467px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 700x467px

What are some cool ideas for non-traditional familiars? I convinced my DM to let me make an origami bat familiar that could turn into things like an origami hat or an origami butterfly like pic related when not in use.

>>52115297
Better? Most likely. Some people don't want to be playing a magic sparkle warrior though, I prefer a Fighter who stays alive through strength and sheer determination to get the job done the old fashioned way.

>>52115313
A sock puppet. And it's just a regular sock puppet.

Fuck, now I know how my bard is gonna make fun of the wizard now.

>>52115289
>find an ok game
>other applications don't see 3edgy5me
>see it starts at 4.30am

fuck

File: Banjo.png (58KB, 200x261px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 200x261px

>>52115347
Also works against the Cleric.

File: IWouldSuckOffTheDMThatLetMePlayThis.png (175KB, 977x328px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 977x328px

>>52115386
Is it really technically "mocking" if that's actually how deities work?

>>52115465
Is there an exact number of followers a god needs to rise to power? Couldn't a large group of people just make the nicest, friendliest god and gather enough worshipers to make him a god?

Our group all agree 4e is fucking fun as fuck, especially its combat, but we also don't like the fact combats take so fucking long to resolve and our roleplaying invariably gets bogged down in mechanics discussion.

I've been saying 5e's rules are a lot more streamlined and the combats would resolve a lot quicker.

Is 5e's combat as fun as it is in 4e? And is it actually streamlined?
I could convince them to port over to 5e.

>>52115369
It's also pretty shitty how most applications want you to just give your character with everything already decided before you know who all the players are.

I'm the sort that can never pick a character or story until I sit down and hash it out with the other players.

Also like 90% of all applications I read the players want to be dickass thieves.

>>52115500
There should be numbers to inform deity hierarchies and strata in Faiths and Avatars, Faiths and Pantheons and Deities and Demigods.

>>52115500
In most D&D settings, I believe they 100% can. The reason you can be a cleric of an ideal or philosophy is because having enough followers basically makes it an actual deity.

>>52115503
It's fun if your DM is a cool guy.
If your DM doesn't let you get creative then it's pretty meh.

File: sully2.jpg (31KB, 285x440px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 285x440px

Group starting a new game this week and im thinking of going monk since noone in my circle have touched it before.

going to roleplay him as a boxer since i it fits all the abilties nice enough, and i dont want to go all asian monk ten thousand years of technique....
also thinking about picking up the Gourmand feat and be sort of a food lover.

anyone got some tips how i can spice up my character? not really decided on a monastic tradition yet either.

>>52115500
This sounds like the exact method an evil person would use to become a god if such thing were possible.

>>52115503
Honestly if you like 4e, it's probably best you house rule it to make combat shorter. 5e is a very different game and gathers the best parts of 2e, 3e and 4e but combat works like 2e and 3e. Some people rather one or the other.

5e is pretty quick in combat and much more open if your DM lets you be creative. In an empty room with 4 goblins though martials basically spam attack and 4e is more fun.

>>52115500
>>52115534
>>52115543
As much as you want it to be, the Flying Sphagetti Monster isn't real.

>>52115503
Is this bait?
If you're serious, "fun" is subjective. It's less crunchy and in-depth, and that could be either bad or good.
There are no moves to choose from for non-spellcasters (for the most part), which my group doesn't miss but many players do. Conversely, you don't have to figure out which 3 or 4 of your 12 modifiers apply to every attack roll, which is almost universally regarded as good.
At the end of the day, it comes down to preference.

>>52115543
How would an evil person convince tons of people to genuinely believe in him/her?

>>52115521
>>52115534
>>52115543
Well I know what my next Clerics goal is. He's gonna become a god or die trying. Now to find a domain no one else really has.

>>52115573
Not him, but why would it be bait, you fucking jobber? What the fuck makes you think that?

>>52115197
Yeah, I guess you're right.

>>52115542
>gourmand
>spice up

Seems like you already have.
Anyway. If you were an open hand monk I'd say that would fit pretty well.

Why not knock people down but because you're a gentlemen you'll never kick them while they're down.
Hit them so hard they fly out of the tavern window and then pay the manager to fix it.
Punch a guy in the noggin they can't take reactions.

Grappler feat could also be fun for you for when you don't want to kill em. In which case maybe dip rogue for the athletics expertise.

>>52115602
Honestly it's there mostly for Clerics, Druids and low level Barbarians. Other classes normally have a better option or don't need the armour.

>>52115573
>How would an evil person convince tons of people to genuinely believe in him/her?

Through deception.
Or just genuinely be a "good person" with an evil heart.

>>52115574
It depends on your setting, but generally you don't just become a god, even through gathering of worshippers.
You need to go through immensely arduous trials, gather pieces of gods into yourself, have a divine patron or have the say-so of an overdeity, to name a few methods.

>>52115599
Because 90% of all posts asking if some aspect of [edition] is "as fun as" that aspect in [edition] are shitty edition war bait.
You will notice, you colossal dipshit, that I did answer the question.

>>52115573
>How would an evil person convince tons of people to genuinely believe in him/her?

Common enemy.
Become the champion of the high elves. Gas the dwarves.

>>52115618
I just want to use javalins and look like a Roman without shitty AC...

>>52115542
You could always go for a bodyguard/bouncer-type character. Way of the Open Palm can be reflavored such that you are slugging well-placed punches at your opponent instead of using kung-fu action, and the level 3 abilities that it gets fit rather nicely for being oppressive in combat. For gourmand, you could say that your bodyguard duties sometimes involved cooking for your charge, or you could even say that you are an aspiring cook but had to take up some rough work to pay the bills.

>>52115616
>Grappler feat could also be fun for you for when you don't want to kill em. In which case maybe dip rogue for the athletics expertise.

solid tip ill look into it, was also thinking the sentinel feat would fit a boxer well, but kinda sold on the gourmand at the moment.

>>52115555
How did combat work in 2e? 3e's was fucking boring and goddamn tedious.

>>52115573
You started off being an autist, but your post was actually helpful.

>>52115652
But anon, dwarves have resistance to poison damage

>>52115687
Well yeah, naturally. Those that were more resistant survived the first attempt.

>>52115644
Don't start off your post like a fucking driveling autist, you pathetic snivelling retard.

>>52115253
That's a great list, I'm gonna start populating the character sheets.

Thanks anon

>>52115684
Nothing I said was out of place. Anybody who spends enough time here is tired of edition war posts.
>Implying I stopped being autistic

>>52115700
Man, this anon is really bringing the swearing A-game today.
Honestly though, you sound like you're personally offended at something I said, because nothing justifies this level of personal insults. Unless, of course, you're the real autist here. I suppose that's always possible.

>>52115664
2e was pretty complicated if you were dealing with Speed Factors, THACO and all the negative bullshit. Half the world was immune to something obscure and while I love 2e more then anything, it's a fucking train wreck of rules and organisation. Never touch that thing unless you already know it.

Basically 5e took 2e combat, took out the retarded negative stuff and fixed initiative with 3e rules. Then it took Proficiency from 4e and some other little bits and pieces it did well, including balancing martials and spellcasters better then ever. Then slapped bounded accuracy onto it all.

Bounded accuracy basically means you don't have a million +2's and -1 effects laying around. If you have a bonus it's normally roll two d20's and take the higher one or a penalty's roll two and take the lower. Makes it faster and easier.

>>52115732
I wasn't baiting, generally curious. I don't give a flying fuck which editon is better. Cheers for the response, but you didn't have to reply like an autist.

Also stop assuming the worst, you fool, that way lies madness and anger at yourself more than anything.

>>52115782
I honestly don't understand why being overly suspicious = being autistic, but ok, whatever.
And don't worry, I only assume the worst on 4chan.

>>52115760
This is one of the more accurate descriptions I've seen of 5e.

File: da1436f1a3a19caa0e9ad3dce1db0c97.jpg (23KB, 430x470px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 430x470px

>>52115313
My DM allowed me to use a miniature Myconid as a familiar. He's my little Fun Guy.

>>52115846
I bet this fun guy pulls all the bitches.

>>52115829
Why would you want to start arguments when you phrase things like you do?

>>52115829
>doesn't want to start an edition war
>yet uses language baiting to start an edition war
Okay, bro.

>>52115854
His tentacles would.

Dunno if anyone would be interested in this, but I found a homebrew port of Star Wars for 5e the other day, and it's pretty well done asides from a few typos and other such errors:

https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/5x9swd/homebrewa_phb_for_a_star_wars_dd_experience/

>>52115618
Don't forget for rangers.

It migh be useful in some cases... Especially with Medium Armor Master. If you're in a party with lots of heavy armor dudes, you can match em for AC, without stealth disadvantage, and it gives you less armor weight so you can lug more gear around.

>>52115880
>His tentacles would.
I think those are technically hyphae.

My DM made a myconid brewmaster. He revealed great truths to us with his hallucinogenic drinks. We recruited him to our tavern that we own. His told us his name is Nich the Homebrewer. Our DM's name is Nich.

>Tfw crippling assburgers

How the fuck do I find my first group without mortifying myself?

>>52116015
There are many ways to go about it. If you want, there's quite a few groups on imgur/reddit/etc. that help new players get into various editions and roleplaying.

Or you can just search on roll20 for something that fits your preferences.

>>52116015
Try Roll20, and maybe text games might be less stressful?

>>52116039
>>52116047
>helpful replies

Wtf I love /tg/ now

>>52116089
Probably because aspies aren't exactly rare here.

Kind of a general question, but what are the obvious red flags for a shit show when you're applying to Roll 20 groups?

New to tabletop, but it's tough finding groups that aren't like all 50 year old men.

I'm looking to roll up a tempest cleric for my next session. Not sure how to build it to fit my idea so I wanted to see if you guys had any input. I rolled these stats:

14
10
9
13
17
12

We are starting at level 3. DM is allowing everything except for third party.

>>52116226
Tiefling Warlock

>>52116226
Read the full descriptions and some posts they've made in forums. There needs to be a balance between tryhard no-fun-allowed dweebs and insufferable shits who are constantly trying to prove to everyone how funny and random they are.

>>52115297
there's literally nothing "defender"ish about the paladin other than protector style

you need to be a crown paladin for that

>>52116238
Wisdom: 17
Con: 14 or 13
Dex: 13 or 14

Rest whatever suits your personality.

>>52116238
Well a Firbolg would get +2 WIS, +1 STR which is pretty good.

Though if you have access to everything a Tempest Theurge could be fun to try. Most games won't allow it but it's not too unbalanced and means you get to be good at the Religion Skill. I'd make a Human Tempest Theurge personally.

>>52115253
For Bounty Hunter you could give them a refluffed Lightning Lure.

>>52115500
>>52115521
>>52115534
>>52115543

The you get worshiped -> receive power thing is from FR, in which Ao cursed the inattentive gods for not caring about their followers by making it so that loss of followers can threaten their divine status, but there's zero indication that it works in the other direction (followers->godhood), and no edition has had rules for ascending to become a deity that was just get followers->receive power.

My bladelock took a three level dip for sneak attack/cunning/ledgerdemain, now I've hit 10th level and need to figure out if I should go back to taking levels in warlock or keep taking levels in rogue.

>>52115618
Treachery paladin sneaking while invisible in a breastplate.

>>52116373
I normally carry a set on Strength based characters just in case I need to sneak. It's rare but with standard rules I can carry a shit ton.

>>52116366
Does sneak attack work with eldritch blast?

>>52116409
No

Triton Stone Sorcerer, what should my level 1 stats be? I was thinking 16, 8, 14, 10, 12, 14 after racial adjustment.

What's the best character build for giving sustained damage?

>>52116238
Variant Human with Resilient Constitution feat

STR 14
DEX 10
CON 14
INT 9
WIS 18
CHA 12

>>52116485

Probably Sentinel + GWM battlemaster fighter.

>>52116485
Champion Fighter and Totem Barb

Champ will have higher damage and Totem will have higher survivability

>>52116238
WIS>STR/DEX>CON>DEX/STR>CHA=INT

Races:
Kenku: goes into battle while mimicing thunder noises with thaumaturgy. Take some points into CHA and take intimidate prof.
Arakocra: not that great since you get flying at level 17, piss off your DM with call lightning and flying before that level.
Hill Dwarf: tough and can wear plate without 15 STR
Wood elf/Firbolg: tribal worshipers of storm gods?
Water genasi: storm/sea god worshipper
Lizardfolk: natural armor is decent. Equivalent to studded armor+1

Feats:
Warcaster, resilient(con), resilient(dex), Shield master, lucky, observant are all great

Spells:
spiritual weapon, silence, bless, command, cure wounds, thunderwave, and shatter are all great spells at your level.

Is removing a the versatile ability from Tridents and calling it a 1d8 weapon fix it?

So, 1d8 one handed and it can be thrown.

>>52116613
Don't set up the game to be a meme.
>everyone run around with pitchforks in one hand!

Does stone's durability from the UA allow you to add Dex as well? I'm not sure since it doesn't specify but I thought Dex was usually a given to AC.

>>52116626
You use one calculation.

>>52116626
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

>>52116626
It changes your AC calculation. No dex.

>>52116485
Great weapon master and sharpshooter builds.
Any fighter, Kensei monk, barbarian, ranger with swift quiver.

Does anyone run games for other /tg/ lurkers? I'd like to play with you guys but the only possible indications on roll20 threads are shitty memes.

>>52116677
I've thought about it before, a lot of people here tend to be pretty flaky though, at least from my experiences.

File: otyugh.jpg (87KB, 388x514px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 388x514px

>>52116677
Yeah, I'm gonna be starting a 5e game relatively soon on roll20, we'll see.

Barbarian(probably Totem)/Champion Half Orc for super crit fisher y/n?

What's the "ideal" split for this?

>>52114794
Hunting traps
Ball bearings
Caltrops
Oil oil oil oil alchemist fire
Pitons and chains blocking off parts of the battlefield or hooking the chains to other people. Bonus points if you have all the chains/hunting traps attached together

Hey, a new 5e DM here. Any advice on how I should build NPCs and monsters for a more sandbox style of play, where I don't really want to simply tailor challenges to match PCs evenly?

I've played a lot of older editions, and building NPCs and monsters was pretty different back there. Looking at some NPCs in the books, I couldn't really tell you what "level" they are, just that they are intended to challenge a party of level x. That's fine and all, likely makes everything a lot clearer, but what do I do if I'm not so much intrested in simply calculating challenges as opposed to simply populating the world (for the purposes of providing a sandbox).

I'd also like to convert older material for this edition. Is there a good way to figure out (other than, as they advice, just getting a feel of that enemy's general challenge and all that) how these things match up?

Sorry if this is a bit unclear. I guess I'm just still unused to the new way of doing things.

>>52116341
That's not true. IIRC 3e had a splat that dealt specifically with ascending to divinehood, including follower thresholds for ascending up the ranks.

>>52116995

Ideally? Just Barb X/Champion 3. You don't need or want any champion or fighter features after level 3 really.

>>52116995
3 champ 17 barb
Maximizes the bonus critical dice from barbarian and champion fighter doesn't contribute anything after 3 until 11 or 15

File: 170777.jpg (310KB, 695x900px) Image search: [Google]

310KB, 695x900px

Has anyone ever played a Blood Hunter? It's one of my GMs approved non-core classes and I thought it looked interesting

>>52116436
Probably don't dump Dex, even if you don't use it for AC calculation as a stone sorcerer, dex saves are some of the most common in the game, and a few good skills also key off of it, I'd dump Int instead.

>>52117086
>. IIRC 3e had a splat that dealt specifically with ascending to divinehood

It did not.

>>52117128
>non-core
You mean homebrew.

>>52117128
It's definitely interesting but its balanced in a way that I disapprove of, and is flavored unlike the core classes.
One of the features makes you incredibly strong but is "balanced" using crippling disadvantages which is just asking for you to overshadow other players or feel bad because your DM used your weakness against you.
The theme of the character is very specific. You don't really feel like your own character but rather a character out of Bloodborne or the Witcher.

A player in your group has rolled up a Wild Magic Sorcerer

How do you respond?

>>52117261

>Remember when I used to defend Wild Magic sorcerers, because of the low statistical chance of rolling the fireball
>Remember the Tier 1 adventure we did where the wild magic sorcerer came within a hair's breadth of TPK'ing the entire party with one after casting shield (only survivor being my character)
>Decide to roll up a Tiefling.

How do you play a rogue/arcane trickster? I'm pretty new to the game and my only other character before was a champion fighter, so I'd appreciate any tips

>>52117261
Stay 21 feet away

File: 5RV8i59.png (389KB, 799x905px) Image search: [Google]

389KB, 799x905px

>>52117256
Well I was planning on refluffing it anyway as a sort of ancestral magic theme anyway. GM has always been cool with stuff like that. I brought up the idea once of changing the Warlock Unearthed Arcana Raven Queen to be about Davy Jones and replace the Raven with a parrot and the guy loved it.

I see what you mean with the Mutagen path, but for the other two paths, what do you mean it's balanced in ways that you disagree with?

Lore Bard looking for a bit more offensive smacking power (without spell slots as those are restricted to mostly support spells)

Magic Initiate Warlock for Burning Blade/Firebolt/Hex, seem good?

(Firebolt for flavor with GFB, shoots green fire from their sword akin to dark souls MLGS for ranged attacks)

>>52117261
I roll a character who fights at long range (eg. a rogue or a wizard with Spell Sniper).

That way, I can easily stay at least 31 feet away from the sorcerer during combat, therefore keeping me out of range of almost every potentially harmful effect that could be triggered by an unlucky roll on the Wild Magic Surge table.

>>52117364

Dip warlock 2, get Eldritch Blast and Agonizing blast, you're good to go.

>>52117390
That's always an option but I'm trying to avoid putting off Bard progression.

That and half my characters have had Warlock 2 and I think my DM is sick of it. If I do decide to go Warlock it'll be all the way to Warlock 5 for level 3 spell slots on short rest

Anything 5e conversions of the 3.5 Ardent out their anywhere?

>>52117352
Was speaking from experience so I read up on the other paths which don't look bad at all. Definitely not a weak class but pretty comparable to the new UAs being released by WoTC.
I guess its just Order of the mutant that rubs me the wrong way.

>>52117364
>>52117453
Yeah, if you don't want to delay your bard progression, Magic Initiate is your best bet. Maybe grab something besides Hex though (Hellish Rebuke is decent and would go with the fire theme) because as a bard you already have a million concentration spells.

>>52117545
That's true I hadn't considered concentration, mainly figured Hex because it's useful as a level 1 spell all game (disadvantage on STR checks when grappler on team etc.)

Serious question guys.

I'm playing a Paladin in Hoard of the Dragon Queen and we're still level 1, so I pick my fighting style come next level.
I know there's a pretty sweet magic greatsword down the line... But should I let that determine my fighting style? Thinking of the character he strikes me as more of a sword-n-board type...
But the other melee guys in the party are a war cleric, and a dwarf fighter who picked Dueling...
Am I better off just picking Defense to avoid specialization and thus not going "Aw man I can't use that weapon, it doesn't match the fighting style I picked"?

File: 1431398536366.jpg (51KB, 552x442px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 552x442px

>>52117453
>Thinks DM is sick of him Warlock Dipping for extra munchkin-ness.
>His solution is to dip just a bit deeper.

Although it was the DM's mistake to allow Multiclassing to begin with. One I've avoided.

Gnomes or Halflings, any why?

For me it's Gnomes, simply because I find them far more evocative than Halflings. Forest Gnomes are like the small forest-folk that are something out of Zelda, with small illusionary abilities and the capability of speaking to small animals. Rock Gnomes evoke to me a strange corruption of the Gnome, being so technologically minded and the name just being Rock Gnome. It's like a weird asteroid fell from the sky into a forest with gnomes, and it's influence infected their minds with ideas of invention and technology.

>>52117626
>Although it was the DM's mistake to allow Multiclassing to begin with. One I've avoided.
Huh, so I'm not alone there.

>>52117626
Thats why I don't want to dip you illiterate quadruple nigger.

Warlock 5 isn't really even a dip at that point, its a full fourth of your potential total level.

>>52117621
Couldn't hurt. You can always just take a dip in fighter to pick up another fighting style if you change your mind.

Have you ever implemented rules for not being simply able to cast spells in the middle of melee like it's nothing? I'm pretty surprised I couldn't find anything like that in the DMG, or anywhere really. Seems to me like that's something a lot of players might be intrested in implementing.

I mean, I guess it's cool you're allowed to just be the coll frontline caster without a thousand hurdles and convoluted rules, but at the same time, not really being able to do anything about the enemy caster pushing Fireballs right up into your face (other than restraining or killing the fucker, I guess) as much as he wants is something a lot of people might not like.

Then again, you also get that, so you know, ups and downs.

So what the fuck is the point of Magic Stone? The only thing I can think of is
>Get a bunch of skellingtons
>give them rocks
>shoot a volley of boolets

>>52117621

It's up to you. If you want to be min-max balls to the wall? Then sure play a great weapon fighter. do you want to be sword and board? Then do that. Like >>52117656 said if you're reeeeeally undecided, take defensive now and then dip fighter 1 for great weapon if you decide to pick it up.

>>52117640
Halflings for me. I like to make them cunning and ambitious people in my worlds, but with little desire for fame to keep them safe. So while you might not hear about them they control the greatest merchant houses, have a say in all political issues in their area and have plenty of powerful mages and warriors in their history. They keep wealth and luxury as private affairs.

File: c39.jpg (20KB, 352x450px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 352x450px

>>52117647
I hate to Stormwinds Fallacy or whatever the fuck it's called, but Multiclassing only leads to grief with players trying to "win" D&D. A lot of players have little imagination for making exciting characters to begin with, and the multiclassing mechanics just distract the hell out of them.

The only thing as bad is Alignment. Alignment only serves two purposes: an Excuse Slip for the lulzy douche who wants to be Le Evil character, and a crappy tool for DM's futile attempts to predict the party's responses to situations.

Although it is occasionally amusing to hear someone's "fluff" for their part-time Warlocking.

>>52117667
It's a way to have the party deal ranged/magic damage when they aren't ranged attackers.

File: 1392616403754.jpg (159KB, 400x387px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 400x387px

>>52117652
You want to be a Warlock to abuse some cantrips/evocations on whatever thin character concept you're dreaming up.

You should throw yourself in a fire, you unimaginative cretin.

>>52117699
You did all this typing when what you could have said was "I play with random people and sometimes they're shitbags".
Now there's your problem; maybe just stop doing that then?

File: thumb.png (80KB, 164x200px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 164x200px

>>52117732
Nah, I don't play with random people at all.
I'm just making an observation based on 20 odd years of DMing experience and lots of time lurking in /tg/ and other forums.

People here will play the most idiotic concepts for "dat optimal extra 1.5 dmg/round".
All based on the idea that their sad 5e experience is going to be a few weeks of a published module before looking for another game, never reaching the levels where all the multiclassing is a drawback.

Just my observation.

Would you let a player just change Firebolt to Thunder (permenantly, not at will) or would they also have to turn down the damage to a d8 or something since Thunder is less resisted than Fire?

>>52117753

there's also fewer vulnerabilities to thunder than fire so I don't really think it will matter that much.

>>52117753
If I was the DM?
I'd just allow Thunder, the amount of "thunder resistant" monsters is completely up to the DM, same for fire.

>>52117621
You really shouldn't base this decision on what you aren't supposed to know, just pick what you like. On another note it seems like your party has enough shields and great weapon fighter style is _fun

>>52117717
C'mon man, he's trying not to multiclass.
I have to agree though, watching people try to wedge 2/3 levels of warlock into their story is cringy.

Is Tremorsense + Thought Spear a valid way to hit someone on the other side of a wall?

>>52117666
Take away their component pouch or their spellcasting focus. Most non-monstrous spellcasters will have one, and their useless without it. A Thief could steal it, or you could try disarming.

>>52117772
>C'mon man, he's trying not to multiclass.
It sounded like he was going to be a Warlock 5/____ X multiclass to me.

>>52117778
I'd rule no; adjoining walls would probably inhibit tremorsense sufficiently as to not allow targeting.

File: XRAY.png (31KB, 478x206px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 478x206px

>>52117778
Just as valid as using pic related from the warlock UA and a sorcerer multiclass to quicken spells through walls

>>52117699
>I hate to Stormwinds Fallacy or whatever the fuck it's called, but Multiclassing only leads to grief with players trying to "win" D&D. A lot of players have little imagination for making exciting characters to begin with, and the multiclassing mechanics just distract the hell out of them.
Yeah, it's part of why I don't allow em.
That and very often they'll go with odd multiclassings without ever roleplaying the "transition"... because as you said, it's just about getting a gamebreaky build.

>The only thing as bad is Alignment. Alignment only serves two purposes: an Excuse Slip for the lulzy douche who wants to be Le Evil character, and a crappy tool for DM's futile attempts to predict the party's responses to situations.
I tend to value alignment but I don't enforce it in any strong way. Really it gives me a nice insight to the players' interpretation of the alignment, and sometimes if they really play it well it lets me throw some Inspiration their way.
Really the only player that sucks at playing anything even remotely ressembling his alignment is the Chaotic Neutral warlock... who never does any chaotic acts at all and just plays it more like true neutral or lawful neutral...

>>52117798
The original post was about magic initiate WLK on lore bard for offensive cantrips.
Some cheeky cunt said "just dip WLK lmao".

>>52117817
Yeah, as I said, it's a tool for PC prediction. And not a very good one.
Honestly the character Backgrounds with their motives and attitudes are much better templates for players, it gives them ideas for building a roleplaying persona that just isn't "Me, but totally badass".

I mean, everyone is going to inject some of themselves into whatever they play, even professional actors do this. Some little quirks and habits and phobias and prejudices are what makes a good Roleplaying character, not "Lawful, and Good".

File: BarbarianFspear.jpg (42KB, 564x814px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 564x814px

Got a 5th player joining my campaign in progress, while the 4th (the Champion) is out for a while. He's making a Barbarian, so I've been working on the Paths, made one unique to my campaign, redid the Animal Totems to represent the Rainforest Barbarians, and "fixed" the Berserker. What do ya think?

Frenzy
Starting when you choose this path at 3rd level, you can go into a frenzy when you rage. If you do so, for the Duration of your rage you gain an extra attack. When your rage ends, you suffer one level of Exhaustion (as described in Conditions).
Mindless Rage
Beginning at 6th level, you can’t be Charmed or Frightened while raging. If you are Charmed or Frightened when you enter your rage, the effect is suspended for the Duration of the rage.
Intimidating Presence
At 10th level, your fearsome mien bolsters the courage of your comrades. As long as you are conscious and not incapacitated, all allies within 30' who can see you may add your proficiency bonus to saves against the Frightened condition.
Retaliation
Starting at 14th level, when you take damage from a creature that is within 5 feet of you, you can use your reaction to make a melee weapon Attack against that creature.

(Note that Barbarians can ignore Exhaustion while Raging in my campaign world).

>>52117808
But isn't the whole point of tremorsense 'seeing' through walls.

The questions are: how much is tremorsense "seeing" and if thought spear is a projectile.

File: Berserker.jpg (42KB, 564x771px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 564x771px

>>52117900
I really really hated the default lvl 10 Berserker ability, its a shitty full action effect (not even based on a core attribute). It's usually a bad sign when a "simple" class ability requires a large paragraph to explain.

So, I've always wanted to make a functioning "goofy illusionist" type of caster. Already tried a Bard in a one-shot once that focused on flashy effects and mind games, but was utterly fucked by the largest encounter being against Constructs with True Sight, showing an obvious, major weakness.

How viable can an Illusionist Wizard be? Is there a decent way for an Illusion Bard, with or without multi-class?

Bonus points for a character built on spells like Mordekainen's Magnificent Mansion and similar "just summon a fucking house" spells and actually being usable in combat, since the RP aspect of that stuff is entirely up to how the char is played.

>>52117921
>But isn't the whole point of tremorsense 'seeing' through walls.
No, the point is to be able to "see" enemies around you when you are otherwise blind or they are invisible.

>>52117933

Illusionist wizards are one of the strongest schools in the game. Even without relying on your illusions, you still get all the normal wizard spells.

>>52117866
No, I totally get you. Like I said, it's never something I really enforce, but on top of all the background stuff it's a nice insight to the characters' morality, which isn't always shown in the backgrounds. I never use it as a "prediction" tool.

It's a pretty generic build but what should I go for when trying to make a Bard whode spells are meant to be usable for his performances and as special effects as well?

Chromatic Orb and the Prismatic spells are pretty obvious pics. Not sure what else to use, though.

>>52118109
Illusions and Enthrall cover everything unless your aim is to blow up the audience Metalocalypse-style.

>>52118158
That was also implied, yes.

Can't rely entirely on my lute skills in a rock-off with the devil.

So how do you choose what spells to take at level 1 as a sorcerer? I'm a stone sorcerer so I was thinking Shield and a Smite spell.

>>52117621
You should unquestionably go two handed, besides the magic greatsword its also kind of dumb to be competing with the other martial guy for one handed weaponry.

>>52117666
Seems really shitty, to be honest. Casters were depowered to be weaker than they've ever been thus far so that wouldn't be necessary, on top of the fact that concentration spells (mostly which are the game changing, abusive effects that'd be layered on top of each other in prior editions) can be disrupted after the fact and can't be combined.

>>52118198
>smite spells
Just take Absorb Elements.

>>52118241
Wouldn't that be something to take at a higher level when I'm not fighting goblins and stuff? I don't know about you but level 1-4 for me rarely has enough enemy spellcasters for it to be useful

>>52118262
You're absolutely right, ignore him. Depending on cash flow (If you can buy magic items, forget it) Chromatic Orb may be good, if not, Ice Knife.

>play one-shot today
>monster hunters returning to group leaders mansion after years
>everything in disarray, butler robot acting weird
>immediately start by 2 people trying to get their shoes cleaned by the robot's "vacuum", results in shoes being disintegrated because it used lasers to clean
>force everyone into slippers because like hell will people drag dirt into the house
>'police' tape on several doors
>immediately go to kitchen, party starts making soup together, leader's son was alone for that time, turned spice cupboard into drug storage, one of us accidentally tastes some coke and is high
>check ball hall because it was also off-limits
>naga demon in the middle dancing and enjoying herself
>watdo
>tell buttler robot to turn the jukebox on
>kick in door, party bursts into hall dancing, cheerily greet demon after she liked the music
>about to shake hands and talk
>cleric remaind in-character, stabs her because fuck demons
>assassin backstabs her for 100 damage
>encounter ended with the assassin as a pile of meat on the kitchen floor

That was a hilarious session start.
Session ended with a fight against the robot's main unit which was carried hard by our assassin taking a huge overdose of the coke before the fight and getting haste for an hour, but getting 5 stacks of exhaustion and dying after. He did the best hit and run I ever saw by permanently having a 90 movement range and running in and out of the basement while stabbing the boss. Was amazing fun, probably also because our usual That Guy wasn't present.

/blog

>>52117699
I can't say I agree. Multiclassing in my play experience has always been about the character trying to more accurately depict their character concept more than for mechanical advantage. Especially since for most cases, you won't actually have a stronger character due to the multiclass.

However, I do agree that seems to be the case with places such as /tg/ and people theorycrafting. People want to multiclass the most overpowered thing and win d&d, as you said. But theorycrafting often takes place in a vacuum and is never what you expect it to be.

I guess, bottom line, for me I like it because it provides options to players. And mechanically I like it because it often results in a character that can do more things (although not necessarily well). The kinds of multiclassing I detest are the ones that just try to pump up the one-trick that you've made into a gimmick for your character. But again, in my experience, I never see that actually happen.

To your point about warlock, its popular for two reasons. Because they're heavily loaded on the front end, and they also supply lots of character fluff, as you surely know.

t. someone who only plays with friends, not randos or at events

>>52115906
Have you put this on the DMsGuild?

File: 1374608894302.jpg (59KB, 409x535px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 409x535px

>>52117261
>tfw play Fighter 1, WMS 1, Arcane Trickster 5
>tfw dipped WMS specifically for the chance to explode
>tfw when I play a Tabaxi archer rogue
>tfw when I go around pretending to be an exorcist conning people with mage hand and catapult (get it?)
>tfw when my backstory is she Oopsed her boyfriend after finding out the pointed way about male Tabaxi sexual physiology, and tragically named her magic crossbow after him

How many of you anons minmax for hilarity?

Is Guiding Bolt the highest damage 1st level spell? Seems crazily good, especially since its radiant and grants advantage, and is a frikkin cleric spell, while wizards and sorcs seem to be about 3d6 or thereabouts.

>>52118335
We have that guy in our group that is overall fun to play with and a nice guy but he always. And I mean ALWAYS. Like, even if he DMs and has a primary NPC. Has a Cleric of some capacity, no matter his remaining classes, and always comes up with some excuse to use it, even if it's pretty obvious that it's almost entirely because of how ridiculously good a single point in Cleric often is.

Can someone tell me if there's any way for a cleric to get the spell Thunderous Smite outside of multiclassing? I want to play a melee focused tempest cleric.

>>52118381
Ask your DM nicely?

>>52118363

In terms of raw damage, it's tied with Chromatic Orb which trades out the advantage for the flexibility in targeting or avoiding vulnerabilities and resistances. Chromatic orb also scales better.

>>52116341
The position on the divine strata a Greyhawk deity occupies is not tied to the number of worshippers, and I have no idea what empowers the gods in Eberron.

>>52118373
I suppose. Maybe he just likes being connected to a deity?

The thing is, you do get a cool cleric power, but your progression in your main class is pushed back. Also there's only so many things you can do on your turn. That's why I don't care so much. Gives them more choices at the cost of a usually weaker character overall.

Even early on, say level 5. If your primary class is a spellcaster but you dipped into something else, you're missing out on your 3rd level spells. That's a pretty significant impact.

Could someone explain me what the Kensei Monk UA actually *does*? Particularly when you take it? I'm not all that familiar with monks, but it seems to me that the answer is seriously "almost nothing, other than fightan with weapons."

I mean, am I getting this right? First feature is that You can pick three martial weapons you get procifiency for. These martial weapons (and others I guess) are what you do your kensei stuff with. They're not monk weapons, though.
Second, instead of getting a bonus monk attack in when you bash someone with your greataxe, you can get a bonus 1d4 damage in, which to me seems like the worse deal all around.
Third, if you slap someone instead of bashing them with your greataxe, you also get +2 to AC. You can't do it if you attack with your greataxe (which, not being a monk weapon, but a specifically differentiated kensei weapon, doesn't actually give you the opportunity to use your bonus action to get in an unarmed strike). Depending on whether or not the bonus attacks from Flurry count as being an "attack action" (I honestly don't know out of hand), you might get that +2 if you flurry though.

So, when you take Kensei, unless I'm missing something, your benefits boil down to: bigger weapons to bash with, a weaker followup (1d4 automatic damage vs an unarmed attack that gets your modifiers AND improves with level), and the ability to get some more defense going.

Honestly, that seems really ehhhh to me. Convoluted (I don't see anything saying kensei weapons count as monk weapons, so now you have TWO special weapon types to keep track of, which don't exactly overlap unless you use a short sword).

So is the point really just "you get to fight with your short sword better"?

>>52118434
https://twitter.com/mikemearls/status/808904018265341952

>>52117751
Seems like the sort of thing people like talking about on the internet more than they like doing it in a group of friends who all want to have fun and stay friends.

>>52118408
There really isn't any actual major downside for taking 1 point in Tempest or War domain for any frontline class. Getting a potential free 2d8 damage or another attack and proficiency with armor and weapons are pretty damn strong boosts for a 1 level set-back.

>>52118448

Okay, that makes it at least something. Still, though, is there EVER actually a point where you're going to take that 1d4 damage over a bonus unarmed attack?

So I tried the Sharpshooter Fighter archetype today with a 3 level dip into Ranger for Hunter's Mark and Colossal Slayer.

It dealt as disappointing damage as expected. Getting only 2 + half level damage on 3 attacks per rest is really, really little especially later on. Was hoping it'd be more useful. Though I suppose being able to disengage CQC by disabling reactions is a pretty nice addition.

>>52118492
Bows.

>>52118492
If you hit two enemies you can do it to both... Which is still shit. You can use it with bows and if you are hasted to get 3 attacks with your attack action you can do it to 3 different targets.

>>52118468
Which class specifically? There's a lot of factors on whether or not there's a downside here. Don't forget that now you've got to be sure you're rocking 13 wis at least which could take away from some of your other stats.
Depending on how fast your group gains levels you'll be behind a power curve.

>>52115906
how do you download this pdf?

I don't wanna run out to buy more printer ink right now

>>52118510
DESU this is the only reason I'd be willing to do kensai.

On a slightly related point, I'd really like wizards to change the language concerning "wielding" a weapon causes you to lose martial arts. Because as they seem to have made clear, you can totally just be "holding" a weapon without actually "wielding" it.
So you can punch-kick while "holding" your bow as any other monk. But then some would argue you're wielding it. It's pretty silly imo.

>>52118494

Sharpshooter starts slow and gets more and more ridiculous the more attacks you have as a fighter. If you're only attacking once per round, sure, and extra 4 damage on one attack isn't a lot. But hit level 11, for example, and now you get up to 6 attacks that all deal an extra 7 damage that stacks with the sharpshooter feat. Assuming you're using the feat and the attacks hit, that's an additional 102 damage. It's an archetype that starts slow and ramps up although I would have liked to see them get more flexibility instead of just ever increasing amounts of pew pew.

Ever have a character you really want to build but it's so unoptimised it's not even good in a just for fun game? Like it's racial abilities will never help out?

Lizardfolk Dragon Sorcerer will never see the light of day.

how would you recreate the Merchant class from Dragon Warrior? is it just a rogue with a guild merchant backstory? maybe some sort of skill or spell support

>>52118564
A good DM will let you swap an ASI or two from your race around to make it work.

>>52118520
Fighter, usually, but also Paladin and even Warlock once.

Fighter/War Domain is a pretty hefty bonus considering your Extra Attacks. A "passive Paladin"just standing around eating hits with Spirit Guardians and Sanctuary is also rather nasty. No idea how the fuck his Warlock thing actually functioned but it somehow worked better than it should'vr. Might have been a bit of a skill monkey with several multiclasses.

>>52118510
>>52118516

Didn't think of ranged weapons, actually. Yeah, I guess that works. Still, though, it seems kind of underwhelming. You get some kinda handy but not really all that amazing combat bonuses (which do get better later, but hey), while shadow monks are being hugely versatile ninjas and open hand monks are getting a lot more tactical capabilities.

I guess it fits in with Four Elements in the "stuff that seems cool on paper but falls short of actual execution" category.

>>52118562
>not fighter lore bard and stealing ranger''s spells like swift quiver
Ranger's just can't win.

>>52118494
DESU I might've gone for horde breaker so you can make even more attacks.

>>52118562
>6 attacks
What am I forgetting here because I only count 3.
And I was actually playing a level 14 character. Best damage I dealt was 70 in one turn using everything I had available including the mark and Slayer and even critting once.

>>52118584
I dunno. At level 11 with GWM and the +3 Ki ability you can hit twice for 2d6+18 with +9 to hit and if you crit or kill something you can do it 3 times. Plus it stacks with Magic Weapons and you can Stunning Strike with it.

Also you can be a super archer, do damage with Nets and get any weapon to use DEX. It's not worthless, I find it quite a good Archtype really.

>>52118582
Well the fighter and pally already have those proficiencies so you have overlap there.

Again, at level 5 you're now doing less than you would've been. Spirit guardians is also a level 3 spell, so you've gotta at least dip 5 levels for that. Sanctuary is level 1 however. Dipping 5 levels outside of fighter has got you missing two ASIs and putting you behind getting another as well.

It really does balance out and doesn't make such an OP character in the end. You become a less powerful fighter, and a less powerful cleric for the sake of options. It's fine.

Warlock is definitely front-loaded, however. Something wotc should fix. But also not terribly broken unless you're min maxing with other cha casters. Those people are lame.

>>52118608
action surge methinks

>>52118608

Action surge my friend. I think the sharpshooter class really benefits from the feat of the same name as that extra +10 really puts their damage into astronomical territory. 2d8+21ish is nothing to sniff at.

>>52118609
Eh, I guess. Maybe I just like the more decisive stuff better than being able to pile on numbers. Something like Way of Shadow appeals to me a lot more than some bonus damage and the like.

I see your point though. It's a lot more viable than I initially thought.

>>52118608
So 11 fighter, 3 ranger? I assume most archers will have the fighting style and the Sharpshooter feat.

White room math here. Action Surge, have a Hunter's Mark on someone and just activated your Sharpshooter abilitity

6 attacks with +7 Attack for 2d6+22 damage each. Not including a magic weapon.

That adds up to an average of 174 damage and increases by 6-12 if you have a half decent magic weapon. It ain't bad.

File: 1413841004996.jpg (225KB, 800x745px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 800x745px

Whats the heaviest, toughest, most armored character I can make? I was thinking between fighter and forge domain cleric.

Is there any kind of goofy CharOp shenanigans that can be used with the level 11 Volley thing? Perhaps Action Surge and Assassinate (ignoring the fact that this would be for a late term character)

>>52118679
>toughest

Definitely want paladin.

>>52118679

In terms of raw AC, a sword and board forge cleric with a dip into fighter 1 for the defensive fighting style (+1AC) I think. In terms of pure, raw toughness a Yuan-ti medium armor bear totem barb/fighter 1 might be tougher but they aren't heavily armored.

>>52118693
Action Surge, Assassinate, Volly, Sharpshooter and try to convince someone to cast a very high level Elemental Weapon spell on you.

>>52118710
>try to convince someone to cast a very high level Elemental Weapon spell on you.

The only character who can actually do this is a Lore Bard, right? (or I guess some sort of weird ass paladin/fullcaster mishmash)

>>52118731
Stone Sorcerer, Multiclass, any Bard, Lore Wizard and Forge Cleric I think.

So Multiclass and bard by RAW.

>>52118701
Too bad I already have paladin in my party
>>52118707
Any feats in particular? I dislike how heavy armor master is too strong early and becomes useless late game.

Is a hexblade good enough on it's own or should I multi class?

>>52118750
Multiclass it with anything and a lot of people out there will hate you. It's too ridiculous to make a class like Paladin SAD or do some melee sorcerer fightan magic.

Would it be worth it for a necromancer to go Warlock 5 for those tasty tasty short rest Animate Dead slots (in addition to other WLK abilities) or nah?

>>52118749
Shield master can help with them fire breaths from dragons. And other dex save damage.

>>52118749

If you just want to be MAXIMUM UBER TOUGH then I'd say Tough, Resilient (Dex), Shield Master, or Lucky. Each makes you tougher in their own way depending on what it is exactly you want. Tough just gives you glorious HP, Resilient makes it easier for you to handle nasty AoE effects, and lucky is a catch-all defensive buff that's hard to go wrong with.

Tough and/or shield master are by far the most flavorful for what you're looking for.

>>52118764

If you want to give up 9th level spells, sure. But I never found much use for casting animate dead within an adventure myself.

Why does every thread become "Should I multiclass X and Warlock"? Seriously.

At this point you're all well aware multiclassing Warlock is pretty much going to make your character better, so don't bother asking random people to show you your theoretical damage so you can wank over it. If you want to be powerful in combat or super edgy then go ahead and do it.

File: black cat thinks.jpg (152KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 1024x768px

>>52118764
>be warlock/necro
>get 16 extra castings of Animate Dead a day

Wow, really makes you think... now I see why all those Clark Ashton Smith necromancers were devil worshipers and shit.

Nice.

>>52118762
My group doesn't really mind a little ridiculousness

File: masturbate.jpg (56KB, 388x478px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 388x478px

>>52118795
Actually, I think he was raising a pretty good point -- getting an extra 64 Skellingtons in a way most people wouldn't think of.

>>52118819
Yeah no, it's a clever idea but you do give up 9th level slots. I'm just salty because I hate the Warlock in both fluff and mechanics, always felt like something that could be summarised as a Wizard, Sorcerer or Cleric who made a deal for power to me.

I only just realised Sorcerer's don't have Find Familiar. I must say I'm a little bit offended by that.

>>52118841
>Extraneous classes that could just be other classes fluffed differently

Welcome to modern D&D.

>>52118854
In my dream world Barbarians would be Fighters, Sorcerer's would be a Wizard Variant and Warlocks wouldn't exist. Weird part is Barbarians and Sorcerers are my favorite classes, I just don't feel like they're that different.

I miss playing with just 2e core.

>>52118841
I kind of wish it didn't have a spammy cantrip like EB.

Would have been interesting to me if they had made the three pact boons be stronger in determining their archetype.

Maybe give the spammy cantrip to the tome who is more of the caster.
Give more melee combat viability to those that select blade.
Allow familiars to be similar to arcane beast masters and be like summoners in their own right.

>>52118866
this is why i wish they had spent longer on the playtest sorc because it was mechanically different from a wizard. warlock too.

File: rly makes u think5.gif (2MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x240px

>>52118841
>no

I don't know what you mean by "no." Yeah, you lose 9th level slots, but if I'm making a skelemancer, unless the DM was planning on letting my PC become a playable lich, I probably would not care.

>who made a deal for power to me.

Well, that's the reason I don't really mind warlock dipping as a general thing, and especially in 4e tended to sprinkle it onto anything (not so crazy about it in 5e), as in S&S deals with dark powers for added magical might are super common.

Elric for example could be viewed as something along the lines of the prototypical infernal or elemental hexblade from 4e, and could be viewed as having several different patrons.

>>52118886
Undying warlock is basically a lich patron.

Makes plenty of sense.

>>52118854
>Welcome to modern D&D.

It began with the thief.

>>52118867
This probably wouldn't stop the warlock multiclassing since tome is the stronger option anyways, but I really like this idea. Having a summoner warlock would be sick.

>>52118886
>Yeah, no

Sorry common slang where I live. Means I'm not really angry about that part. He did have a good idea it what I meant

>>52118867
Binder should've been core. It's a more interesting design then Warlock and doesn't really fit under something else, also fills the same kinda character concepts.

>>52118893
>Not playing with just Fighting Men

I'm sorry your life sucked.

>>52118923
>not playing a party of nothing but clerics and magic users, with a sole fighting man as their leader in case of magic bows & swords

Wow what a wretched existence you've led.

Speaking of warlocks.
Think I could convince my DM to let me have a faerie dragon as a familiar instead of the 3 provided, assuming it's like a red one?

The cantrips it can provide aren't anything insane, however the breath could actually be somewhat useful.

I'd just like something fey that isn't going to get me bombarded with "hey, listen!" jokes over the course of the campaign.

>>52118866

Yeah I read that excuse in the 2nd ed DM as well "Its just another Fighter" in the class making optional rule. Its bullshit because if they ever actually believed that shit then there would be no Ranger Paladin Druid or Bard

>>52118950
I'd actually love a PC to have a faerie dragon, personally. Would be a cool minor thing if there was a time skip and the dragon has changed color. Helps that I also like to take level 20 PCs from past campaigns and include them as retired NPCs or questgivers in future campaigns. Cameos are fun.

>That sad moment I realise D&D has changed too much since I began and I'd be happier with another system

Today, is not a good day. Not thread related but anyone know a good d20 system that isn't full of snivelling autistic children?

>>52118987
I don't know *any* system that is both good and without autists.

Consider finding a new hobby?

How do you feel about a forever level 1 campaign? Level 4 max if it too hard for you.

>>52118987
just find a good group, whatever the game

>>52119009
I'd get bored really fast desu.
What's the point of that?

>>52118987
Go be a cunt elsewhere.

>>52119009
What is the point of being shitty forever?

Or is it just the perception of it being "hard mode?" You can do that with any level.

>>52119014
Aw, shit. That sounds like I'm calling D&D full of kids. Whoops. I meant all of Pathfinder and shit is, you guys are one of the better generals.

>>52119009

Pointless and boring. Who wants to spend an entire campaign shitting their pants when a goblin picking its nose turns the corner.

>>52119009
i both like the idea but also want there to be some form of character advancement in terms of abilities. i'm running a forever level 3 campaign, but letting people pick higher level abilities up as we go on.

>>52118950
Hey it's me, your DM.
I'm okay with you having a faerie dragon. None of the abilities are things that can't be found on one of the existing familiar options, plus the cantrips are pretty weak and stuff you could cast anyways.

>>52118940
>He doesn't know clerics are new as fuck
>Like years after the Original Campaign began as a series of tentative houserules to a miniatures wargame

Go back to preschool you child.

Is there any spell like Dimensional Anchor to block plane shifts and teleports? None is jumping out at me apart from MCoP.

>>52119079

Only thing I can think of is Counterspelling it

>>52119079

Mordekainen's Private Sanctum is the only one I'm aware of. Probably wish too I guess.

>>52119079
magic circle

>>52119079
Magic circle: level 3
forbiddance: level 6 (ritual)
antimagic circle: level 8
forcecage: level 7

>>52119013
>>52119020
>>52119030
To focus on tactic, learning enemy behavior, resource management and epic loots made from the enemy corpse like monster hunter
>>52119033
It the item grind and crafting. Scoll preparation and herbalism for the magic user.

>>52119042
Well that's not entirely true, my DM.
They do have a breath weapon.

Advancement: experience, milestones, story-dictated or something else? How does your group do it?

I swore by experience for a long time, but I've been doing a more plot-focused campaign, and just giving levels to them when they reach certain points honestly seems to be having a really positive effect. It's more relaxed and nobody's trying to do stupid shit all the time for maximum gains.

I'm probably going back to experience if I run a sandbox campaign or something later, but for this plot-driven is really good.

>>52119054
Original core isn't "new" by my standards, plus First Fantasy Campaign had clerics & holy swords (for them specifically) so its fine for even the groggiest of grognards.

>>52119147
It's similar enough to the poisoned stings that the familiars have so I'm cool with it.
You hyped for Sunday?

>>52119124
>>52119090

Forcecage and counterspell are the kind of solutions I need, I'm looking to stop a demon from escaping when defeated.

>>52119152
I've found that milestone leveling has worked great for controlling level-hungry power gamers while making a less confusing game for casuals. It also means I can throw whatever I want at the party without having to calculate XP for it, and I can appropriately give levels to players who RP a lot more than fight.

>>52119144
>To focus on tactic, learning enemy behavior, resource management and epic loots made from the enemy corpse like monster hunter

Works for all levels, still doesn't even 1% justify restricting the PCs to just a shitty portion of game experience with brittle, samey characters.

>>52119144
>It the item grind and crafting. Scoll preparation and herbalism for the magic user.
i feel it, i still think getting new abilities sometimes is nice.
my game rn everyone is level 3+1, and i let them take an ability from any class/archetype or whatever with permission that someone could get at level 4 or below. soon i'll let them take a level 5 ability.

>>52119182
This is exactly how I feel. The party's not running off to punch random shit because it gives them benefits, and everyone is focusing on the story since they're not punished for being faster/slower than they're "supposed" to be or bypassing something by getting creative.

And like you say, I also don't need to worry about how much they need to kill to advance, and whether an action-heavy situation is going to push them too much or if I need to throw in random encounters just to top them off.

It's a good system.

>>52119144

Then I'd cap it out at level 8, personally. Maybe let spell casters get their 5th level slots eventually. Level 1 means anything and everything can kill them. You can't really have a cool monster hunter campaign when a single bandit with a greatsword can one shot almost any PC. On top of that, everyone will likely be bored because they'll never get the stuff that makes their class feel cool. Wizards would get one first level spell, per day, forever. That's shit and would be completely awful to play. "I cast chromatic orb! Oh, well, I missed, cantrips for the rest of the day I guess." Paladins wouldn't get smites, rogues don't get cunning action, etc.

I like the idea but raise the campaign level to 8 so the classes feel distinct, they have enough HP to struggle against their foes and such. The thing is that it's all fine and good to say 'tactics' but staying at level 1 means they will lack all of the abilities and resources that let players get creative in the game without the threat of terminal existence failure any time they take any damage. It'll be bad, boring, and completely unfun for the players. The only thing a fighter would be able to do is "I walk up and hit it." That's all they can do, all combat, every combat, for the entire campaign.

>>52119201
>Wizards would get one first level spell, per day, forever.
what

>>52119212

My mistake, two spell slots. Still shit and boring.

>>52119175
Yeah dawg

>>52118956
>>52118866
You can do that with pretty much everyone. I'd just go with Paladin, Bard, Ranger & Barbarian as the 4 basic classes, as the first 3 can cover nearly all other classes and the last would be the default ultraresourceful muggle.

Paladin: Cavalier & Cleric stuff (full progression possible)
Bard: Fighter, Thief, & Druid stuff (full progression possible)
Ranger: Magic-User & Druid stuff (full progression possible)

Mere magic users, clerics, and druids could then be used as NPCs & antagonists, especially fitting with how paladins didn't like druids and barbarians didn't like clerics and magic users.

Starting with heavily versatile archetypes like that also gives you more room to add.

Again, that's just if you only wanted 4 classes, what I'd go with.

>>52119238
Wouldn't work with D&D because that's new and scary. It is an interesting design idea though, I think an RPG with those as the 4 classes would be cool

>tfw I literally went Veng Paladin 3 / Phoenix Sorc 1 just for the Mantle of Flame
Fluff builds are fun.

Until they get you killed.

>>52119269
How in the ever loving universe of fuck did a single level multiclass get you killed?

>>52119275
Very lethal campaign that gets like, a PC death every other session.

>>52119281
But how did that kill your character?

>>52119291
It didn't, I'm just expecting it to.

Playing LMoP because we've heard good things, is there enough magic weapons for a Paladin/Sorcerer or should I take Magic Weapon at some point?

>>52118749
> I dislike how heavy armor master is too strong early and becomes useless late game.
This is also how AC functions now that overall hit rates tend to increase for everyone later in the game.
Since every extra point in AC becomes more valuable the higher your AC already was relative to enemy hit rates, having a lot of it is more valuable early in the game than it is later in the game.

A high-AC build is constantly rotting away, and you need more and more for it to matter the same amount. Same as damage and HP and damage reduction, except with AC there are very few sources of it, and most of them are magic items the majority of which are intentionally designed to be a full rareness category too high to be any good compared to other magic items you could've gotten.

>>52119317
If you want spoilerz, iirc there is a device that lets you temporarily enchant weapons and armor, so yes, there's enough for everyone.

>>52119317

You'll be fine, and magic weapons aren't something you NEED until levels 5+ when resistance to non-magical slashing shows up. Don't fret about it. There's a couple of unique magic items in LMoP.

>>52119326
>>52119334
Alright sweet. Also any particular damage types to avoid? I assume there's a Green Dragon from the cover of the box so I'm not grabbing any poison (It's shit anyway).

File: ernesto-irawan-female-wizard-copy.jpg (190KB, 1095x1500px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 1095x1500px

>>52119227
plus arcane recovery, plus they can learn 6 spells at level 1, plus they get to add spells they find to their book and cast them
more shit for other casters to be honest.

>>52119323
>>52118749
It heavily depends on what sort of enemies the DM wants to use. Very high level PCs can still be threatened by groups of lower leveled foes quite well.

If you assume you will always be faced by a monster of equal level, then yeah, AC builds are not so great.

How would one go about killing a god?
The BBEG in my campaign plans on killing Mystra and becoming the new god of magic, but how would he do it?
Also are there statblocks for gods or their avatars in 5e?

>>52119342

Nah, just roll with what you like. Resistances and immunities come more into play later, and the answer to that question depends on if you're planning to go paladin heavy or sorcerer heavy with your multiclass.

>>52119345
True, I was just using it as an illustrative example. Level 1 sucks for everyone even if it sucks a shade less for wizards. Every time I have to play it (I play a lot in the AL) I want to stab my eyes out.

>>52119351
Yeah, come to think of it, both AC and heavy armor master, are pretty great against masses of lower-level enemies.
HAM manages because most enemies get multiattack, so you essentially get damage reduction equal to the value given by HAM multiplied by the number of attacks made by your foe.

>>52119373
>True, I was just
yeah, sorry, i'm just nitpicking.

>>52119368

Too easy, Mystra dies from literally one casting of Karsus's Avatar. You can also kill her with the right build in one hit from her own staff, so just disarm her first.

>>52119384
>>52119351
>>52119323

And I'd point out that many lower CR foes are not at all what one would think of as "swarm" enemies -- a Blackguard or Shield Guardian doesn't strike me as a monster with an expiration date despite their single digit CR. You could probably challenge high level PCs indefinitely with single digit CR foes.

>>52119184
>>52119193
>>52119201
I see, need to homebrew something to cover for the lack of spell and add some activity for other. Maybe fighting stance for melee and special "ammo" for mage to craft.

I will need to draft this out more.

>>52119430
i'm working on something similar rn

How feasible would it be to run a Pirates of the Caribbean campaign in 5e?

>>52119469

Way easier than a normal campaign probably.

>>52119479
How's that?
Probably because of all the roleplaying opportunities?

>>52119509
Because most/all signature monsters are already in and because the easiest map in the universe to use in an exploration game is a ship rather than dungeons etc. that change all the time.

>>52119479
>>52119509
Or is it because you can just take any idea and just run with it? Creative freedom, ho.

>>52119368
Do you have her stats from Faiths and Avatars or Faiths and Pantheons?
Just convert them over to 5e.

In FR specifically, the new god of magic needs to have the explicit approval of Ao otherwise it's a no go and will remain a mortal.

>>52119469
On the topic of this, what's the best way to run ship to ship/ship to monster combat?

is there a version of the savant that isn't OP as shit? i want to let my players use it because it's really thematically cool but its just so bonkers

File: tumblrnose the goblin.jpg (25KB, 262x315px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 262x315px

>>52119588
I'd just have the monsters and enemies board the ship or exchange long range projectile fire crew to crew.

>>52119588
Ship is caught in a storm, so there are occasional non-combat objectives to be accomplished such as getting someone to quickly resecure the sails, or put out a fire from when a lightning bolt in the storm hit the deck.

All while a couple sea trolls and a few giant octopus flobber on board deciding this is a good time to snack.

>>52119469
>>52119479
>>52119588
>>52119619
>>52119711
Pirates of the Caribbean has surprisingly well integrated supernatural elements.

>>52119736

It's actually one of the more interesting worlds. Sadly, the films are really bad save for the first one. Though I do sorta have a soft-spot for Dead Man's Chest cause of the trio duel.

I actually have crazy cautious optimism for the next one.

>>52119764
The first two movies are pretty fucking rad.

>>52119764
Always wanted to do a good three way battle in D&D but players always proved to be too stupid to think beyond murder everything.

>>52119803
>>52119795

Can the Jack/Will/Norrington be done in this system while feeling coherent? I was thinking this the other day but with how the combat is, it's too tied down to make those flashy moments. A friend suggested just throwing combat rules out of the window and turn it into a Skill Challenge ala 4e. Haven't played 4e but I did see Matt Coleville's video on applying skill challenges for moments and it looked pretty neat. What do you anons, think?

>>52119764
>Dead Man's Chest
>not At World's End
Fight me, ye swarthy landlubber.

>>52119368
I don't think any gods has stats in 5e.

Tiamat kinda has one but after people one shotting her, I doubt they will give out anymore stats.

>>52119819

World's End had potential but it never reached that point along with questionable story decisions (killing Norrington early, throwing Yun Fat's character under the grinder after building up him to be somewhat important, etc.) The battle at the whirlpool was pretty fine though.

Is necromancy worth pursuing in 5e, it seems kinda lame that they've limited it to humanoids.

File: Rattlerattle what's in this closet.gif (486KB, 387x368px) Image search: [Google]

486KB, 387x368px

>>52119974
It's overpowered.

>>52119974
Any large number of damage sources is pretty strong thanks to bounded accuracy, which means that Animate Object, Animate Dead, and the variable CR/Quantity summons have potential to be abused.

It's not that they are OP or anything inherently, but they can all be used to fundamentally alter the flow of the game and its difficulty.

>>52119834
How were they oneshotting her?


I'd recommend building gods' avatars only, and based off Tiamat's stats.

I was actually thinking of starting a project statting them myself and this'll definitely give me incentive.

>>52119974
It's... Impractical.

Unlike other editions where you can get inventive and interesting with your empoered undead minions, you're pretty much limited to hordes of skeletons, but your abilities reward this play style.

However, hordes of skeletons are vulnerable to AoE spells that once your GM gets tired of, kills them all with a fireball not realising how much you've invested into them.

And if he doesn't, it varies from toxically powerful killing everything with weight of dice, and just outright toxic as everyone else at the table hates you for trying to resolve fifty seven turns to each of their one.

The other alternative is just use them as kinda shitty summons, "Oh you killed a few guys in battle, raise em up and use a few of them as minions for the next battle.. But kind of a waste of a level 3 slot and you have to be a necromancer to get more than one so its impractical for other classes to use."

>>52120044
I will pass on it then I guess.

>>52120044
>Unlike other editions where you can get inventive and interesting with your empoered undead minions

You really don't have "options" in other editions for your undead minions, dude.

TSR: "Animate fucking everything, there's no limit."
3e: "Animate fucking everything, so long as its something relatively badass, you will have enough Command Undead (the spell) slots."
4e: "meh"

>However, hordes of skeletons are vulnerable to AoE spells

Globe of Invuln.

>>52119834
>>52120034
By using moronic unofficial shit along with the dumbest possible interpretation thereof.

>>52120114
which?

>>52120117
By interpreting the UA twidruid's "add this to the damage of a spell" as "add this many, many, MANY times to the damage of a spell."

Has nothing to do with Tiamat, is just theorycrafting.

>>52120125
>Still not understanding the interpretation

It's RAW. You only add the damage once.

Much like you only add damage to a fireball once and it hurts multiple targets.

>>52120125
That's not a misinterpretation of the feature though, that's straight up how damage is calculated with Magic Missile when you tack additional damage onto the roll, RAW.

>>52120114
What were they doing?

>>52120114
The first stupid assumption involved is that a druid UA that says "spell" doesn't mean "druid spell", even though they explicitly said that they don't write UA to interact with multiclassing whatsoever. We even have precedent for this wrong assumption, in the UA Beast Conclave Ranger, which says "level" to mean "ranger level"

File: 0f5dd943d53aafe448743a4f89909ac7.jpg (771KB, 1050x1350px) Image search: [Google]

771KB, 1050x1350px

DMs, how do you go about guiding your players through dungeons?

I'm so far doing alright with describing key rooms but I want to give them enough detail that they have enough agency to control where they want to go instead of going by gut from descriptions. I make my descriptions as detailed as possible but I also want to immerse them so much that they're just as much of in the know of what I see.

Like take the map for example, I want to describe the way they traverse the hallways in-between the key rooms without being a generic "You see a hallway stretching 50 feet to your right. You could just make the a bend to the left at the end of it." especially when we reach rather complex dungeons with many hallways. I don't want to go "You go around a series of hallways and see many rooms, each room contain nothing of value, what do you do?" It just makes them feel I'm the one dragging them along the map instead of them doing it themselves.

Is that all there is to it? Cause I imagine this detailed dungeon complex but I feel inept in conveying that to my players so they can take the initiative to explore. Or would go into such great detail also a double-edged sword? (I mean, exploring the umpteenth room and find nothing will be tedious I admit)

>>52120151
Houseruling an ability that allows you to add to the damage of a spell so that its added to each instance of damage of a spell. The goal is to shit up the game and go "omg, WotC made the boss monster too easy, because if you use houserules, any foe can be trivialized!"

The real "fun" with this retarded interpretation would be Elemental Weapon to add 14d10 (or whatever would be possible with lore bard dip) per weapon hit, in general.

>>52120175
I don't care about the maze like element in dungeons.

>>52120197
Wizards should release more epic monster rules then, also why the fuck are people so retarded?

>>52120175
My current DM largely ignores the exploration of a dungeon, he mentions key rooms, and lets us choose branching paths, but everything is vague and only special features and key rooms get fuller description.

I tend to run more dungeon crawly games, so i describe every passage in more detail, running off a map i personally have, and let them build a map of their own if they wish, based on description. I only correct dimensions as they go, just for the sake of simplicity.

Try and come up some unique overarching figures of a dungeon, water features, how it's lit, unique architecture, and build on that. When they get to Hallway B, between rooms X and R, and it has next to nothing, just mention a cold stone hall, lit by a single torch.

>>52120221
>Wizards should release more epic monster rules then

...to compensate for people's retarded house rules? No.

>>52120197
The only one misinterpreting the Nuclear Druid is you, friendo. It adds the d10s to a single roll of damage. Magic missile only has a single roll of damage, much like an AoE spell, with all darts created by magic missile dealing the damage as rolled. It's not a misinterpretation of the Harvest Scythe feature, it's a quirk of how damage is rolled for Magic Missile. And it gets fixed the second that Harvest Scythe is amended with the word "Druid" before the word spell.

>>52120241
What, because they're needed, you driveling fool.

>>52120262
Will it allow for the oneshotting of Tiamat?
How much damage is a 20th level doing?

>>52120262
Choosing to misinterpret adding to damage as "adding to each instance of damage" is retarded as well as toxic as hell, since it leads to mass autistic whining about how "OMG TIAMAT TOO WEAK BECAUSE MY HOUSERULE KILLS HER WITH THIS ONE EBIN TRICK xD"

>>52120277
>toxic
fuck off back to tumblr and stop complaining about UA being unbalanced when multiclassed.

>>52120277
>Choosing to misinterpret adding to damage as "adding to each instance of damage" is retarded
No it isn't, when you use magic missile you roll damage once and apply that damage to each dart.

>>52120270
With a level 6 grave cleric (Give them 2 levels of fighter if you want, too) and level 18 twilight druid / level 2 fighter, it's

((1d4+1+9d10)*11)*2+((1d4+1+9d10)*10)*2 damage.
Without grave cleric, simply halve the damage.

And that's in a single round, without using your reaction or bonus action (You could probably deal more damage if you find a use for a reaction/bonus action, though it won't be much)

>>52120264

>What, because they're needed

Effectively anything of CR 13+ is "epic" (see: the archmage and his 9th level spells, at CR 12). I agree that more high level foes are good, but I wouldn't say they are needed. You can rape most level 20 parties to death using single digit CR foes.

>>52120277
You are wrong, according to Crawford.

The "build" is also wrong, because it assumes that the UA for a druid needs to specify that it applies to druid things specifically, even though the same "issue" was brought up with the UA ranger.

>muh 1 dip beast conclave scaling pet!

Does Polearm Mastsr work with a spear if you're twohanding it?

>>52120331
No, spears aren't polearms (for the purposes of the feat).

>>52120301
Crawford is also the guy who okayed The Simulacrum Thing, which in no uncertain terms allows 14,400 simulacrums a day, so in the Crawfordverse I'd just destroy Tiamat with my army of a hundred thousand me's.

>>52120299
This is the wonder of bounded accuracy, yes, but apparently sniveling retards are claiming they can oneshot Tiamat, which unless the DM is also a fucking retard is unlikely.

>>52120346
Guy was perfectly fine with the same paladin auras stacking before the errata as well. He is THE RAWfag.

>>52120296
How are you claiming that damage? What are you using to synergize?

>>52120350
>but apparently sniveling retards are claiming they can oneshot Tiamat

I don't see what that has to do with the need for epic monsters. Poorly tested and poorly interpreted TwiDruid nonsense and simulacra abuse is not a valid reason for epic monsters, but certainly epic monsters are desirable nonetheless. Gibbering Orbs are always relevant.

>>52120372
Druid casts level 9 magic missile. They use their dice to improve the damage from 1d4+1 to 1d4+1+9d10. The grave cleric had previously, on their turn, used an action to make the enemy vulnerable.
The cleric then uses a stored reaction (Either from a set-up round or from action surge on the same round) to use their channel divinity to make the enemy vulnerable again.
The druid then uses an action surge, and does the same again with a level 8 magic missile.

Half the people don't get it because nobody understood how magic missile worked in the first place.