/5eg/ Fifth Edition General:

>>52391824
DC100 at the absolute minimum

>>52391824
We already know its bait you silly goose

Are there any good flavor feats to take on an Enchanter aside from Actor? I'm playing more of an intimidation and fear illusion character and the lying doesn't fit into it well.

I want to make a really over the top magician character, like full on card tricks and stupid illusions with hammy over the top acting and puns.
1. Bard or wizard? I feel like bars is probably better though our group has had terrible history with bards ( we've lost 2 to being unable to play often and the 3rd was the first PC to die and now bards are kind of a meme in our group)
2. Would this end up just annoying the other players? Was thinking a hammier mark hamil voice, with excessive showmanship and replacing my spells visually with shit like card tricks and other generic magic tricks and a name like X the magnificent.
I want to encourage the group to get in character a bit more, and if I go a bit over the top would that help or be annoying/cringy?

>>52391867
Bard

>>52391867
half elf bard so you can be the skillmonkey you always wanted to be

What should I focus my ASI on with my Stone Sorcerer?

Cha isn't really that important because most of my spells are buffs, smites or utility. Str would only increase my damage very little but the extra chance to hit would be ok. Maxing Con seems like the best coice because of the saving throws, HP and AC.

As for feats War Caster and Tough maybe? Mobile could be nice combined with Booming Blade. Any other ones that could be cool?

>>52391856
Keen mind and Observerant could be good

>>52391877
>>52391876
Yeah, I figured bard would make a lot more sense, though replacing the instrument with something a bit more fitting, like cards or even the top hat.
What are some good fitting spells/good bard spells in general? I will be lore bard, and will get counterspell and such but what are some other necessities?

My main question was the second one, do s anyone have experience playing an over the top character in a group that doesn't get hella into character? Does it help or is it cringy? We're all new I'm trying to get everyone in a bit more

File: 1427387396478.jpg (79KB, 500x650px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 500x650px

What are your takes on the UA of the new paladin oaths? Sadly missed the general talk of it when it came out.

>>52391953
Treachery: Stupid OP level 20 ability
Conquest: Boring

>>52391961
Sadly not a good chunk of the campaigns reach 20.

>>52391953
Edgy and only meant for NPCs and idiots who actually run evil campaigns.

>>52391953
edgy bullshit that didn't fit the paladin class at all.

>>52391953
Weak and better to just stick with the original oaths and Crown.

>>52389175
Late to respond, but the idea is that alignment doesn't actually affect those things.

Somebody's not going to say 'This guy's evil, so they're a dick.'
They tell whether or not you're evil by interracting with you.

Probably the only exception is pixies which can make you on touch make a DC 10 charisma save or else they find out your alignment.

>>52391953
With some reflavouring they can work. I made the Treachery Paladins in the Goldpact from Pillars of eternity.

Conquest feels alright for something similar to an edgy Crown Paladin.

>>52391953
Conquest: Plain, nothing awfully special.
Treachery: Almost every single ability is about giving you advantage. Spell list is good. Pretty much a slightly better vengenace paladin. Could've been done better.

>>52391953
>>52391961
>>52391997
>>52392000
>>52392020
>>52392023
>>52392036
>>52392048
So out of all the archetype UAs, which options are the good ones? Or are there too many too list?

>>52392034
>>52389175
My favorite role of alignment is that if you perform actions seriously against your alignment, retribution is far worse and more prevalent, and generally the gods/fate approves more of people doing actions within their alignment.

So in other words, good people performing brutal murders is going to cause revenants and ghosts to form more frequently, evil types are more likely to be given missions by fiends or evil gods and result in more anger if they disobey, while if a fiend attempts to coerce or tempt a good person they are more likely to laugh it off if they disobey (they were merely pretending).

File: image.jpg (760KB, 4224x2560px) Image search: [Google]

760KB, 4224x2560px

So we got a new guy joining who's a Warlock, my oath of conquest paladin grew up in a place that was pretty much fantasy Gotham because of Warlocks.

What's a good way of RPing my distrust without being overtly adversarial, for the sake of not shitting the group up? Do I just just restrain my PC's urge to subjugate because he'll be a useful asset or some shit?

I've been playing the same campaign for 2 and a half years, and we're only at level 12. We started at level 3. Is this the DM being stingy?

We don't use xp, we level up when the DM says we do.

>>52392101
Question him, keep on eye on his actions and do your own investigations into his motives.Don't go willingly with his ways.

>>52392101
Dominate him with your pungent farts.

File: 1427940845359.gif (1MB, 394x297px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 394x297px

>>52392106
Seems stingy. I prefer it when players get experience from various things. Hell even more fun when one player goes out of his way to things and ends up more rewarded in xp without realizing it.

>>52392101
Most Warlocks hide the fact that they are warlocks. I would say it really depends on how he plays his character.

Maybe there is room for character development, with your character slowly realizing that warlocks made their pacts for different reasons, some are good others are evil.

>>52392096
Hm. I suppose. If it's a case of 'acting against your alignment has some weird karma consequences, but you're not told 'YOU MUST CHANGE ALIGNMENT NOW''
And players can switch alignment with some sort of odd ritual somehow. Maybe.

So alignment is a 'This is how you've chosen to live life, don't fuck itup.'

But how do you judge a true neutral character? They might do a bit of everything
But how do you punish an evil character? If you do a good deed as an evil character, does it get no reward, or what?

>>52392068
Not a lot of good ones.
Tranquility monk.
Stone sorcerer.
...I really can't think of anything else.

>>52391215
>>52391238
>>52391251
Charm person can 'win' a combat if you do it right.

>Charm person without anyone noticing
>Guy becomes friend
>Guy then convinces teammates to stop fighting his friends
>You all pass without a fight
However, you'll likely have to do a bit of acting, because they might notice
>Okay, you're saying these guys are your friends, but you only met them just now? Are you sure about that?

I'm about to start up a new campaign, and I'd like to ease back into DMing with pregens. Do you think it's worth waiting for Yawning Portal, or should I just pick up one of the existing modules?

>>52392208
We have a pdf in the mega already. Under adventures.

File: 1329011416252.jpg (10KB, 234x215px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 234x215px

My group plays with a guy who's literally a diagnosed autistic. He has trouble with things like social cues, reading what is and isn't appropriate, and remembering the rules.

What's the best way to give him a hand, if there is one? He's our friend, so we all try to help him along in our own way, but it occurred to me that none of us are even tangentially involved in a field that'd inform us of how to best help a guy like him to function in a social setting.

>>52392140
>But how do you judge a true neutral character? They might do a bit of everything

Exactly. The idea came to me from ADOM, in which a Chaotic character can rob stores while a Lawful character becomes cursed for so doing, etc.

While in AD&D True Neutral is more brutal (by AD&D standards, typically their Good is more like our Neutral, their Neutral is more like our Evil), IMC Neutral is more "both CE and Neutral are "I do what I want" on some level but a Neutral char has limits. Fiends tend to be more... neutral to them, and likewise, killing a merchant to take his possessions probably will result in retribution, but they can be more trigger happy.

>But how do you punish an evil character? If you do a good deed as an evil character, does it get no reward, or what?

Good and Evil aren't symmetrical: Good characters acknowledge Evil and avoid Evil acts. Evil characters do not normally acknowledge Good (they tend to think of themselves as such or that Good people are deceiving them, etc). Instead, fiends and dark gods get an impression that Evil types are their "property" and expect compliance. They have a sixth sense about whose souls will become their property after death, so, paradoxically, fiends have much less patience with Evil types than Good types.

Obviously they will still kill Good characters where necessary, but they tend to get a vague, difficult to pin down idea that Good types are under some sort of higher protection and that killing them is less desirable, and don't seriously expect compliance, while they expect Evil types to work with them and are likely to lose their shit if an Evil type tells them no. Its not conscious enough that they can glance at a party and say "Oh, you got an Evil dude, how do you like them apples, Mr Paladin?" though.

/tg/ I'm really bored.

Is Planescape Torment good? Can I install it and play straight away or do I need to get mods or whatever for it? Also, where would you suggest I get a decent torrent for it?

>>52392117
>>52392135

Cheers for the advice, I think I could see him being on constant guard for a while, refusing to let new guy do petty stuff like take watch or cook food before warming up once he's got a good idea of the motives and background of Warlock.
Also true that he might not be aware that the guy is a Warlock and not some other magic man but I've got a good enough understanding of the "signs" of a dark magic user.

Just see how things go I guess

>>52392249
Just make him play as a wizard and he sounds perfect rp wise.

>>52392106
>>52392131
then you guys try to dm and level people up after every session and give magic items out like candy and wonder when your players get sick of it after a few games and leave because it takes away from the sense of accomplishment when you level up at appropriate times

your dm is good and youre a faggot

>>52392140
>And players can switch alignment with some sort of odd ritual somehow. Maybe.

If the PC consistently acts in accordance with a new alignment, the DM can propose alignment change, for example.

>>52392266
>after every session
>not having a constructive plan
>giving out magic items like candy ever instead of various stages after hard runs in critical moments in the campaign as you close it out

It's like you can't dm or your players are shit.

>>52392284
its the vibe i get from these retards that they would play games like that

>le im only level tweeelve!

fucktard wants his campaign to end or doesnt realize just how bad high level play is

>>52391953
Take your UA paladin oaths and shove it you whiny bitch.

>>52392253
It's good. If you can't find a good torrent or can't find a way to make it work on a current PC, they sell a compatible version for like $10 on Gog.

>>52392303
>fucktard wants his campaign to end or doesnt realize just how bad high level play is
Or maybe he feels like the campaign is getting stale because there's little sense of progression or advancement.

So how is caster supremacy in 5e? I really wanted to go barbarian but I fear being overshadowed by casters.

>>52392344
then maybe he should roleplay or start a new campaign

>>52392228
Oh really? I thought it wasn't released yet. Thanks, anon, I'll give it a look when I get home.

Anyone have any thoughts on it so far?

>>52392348
It's not that bad. You do run into situations where casters can skip encounters by flying/scrying/teleporting/turning into birds/turning into gas, but the concentration rules limit them. Martials do more damage, and barbarians in particular are practically impossible to kill.

>>52392348
read the book and use your brain

martials are fine in 5e and the only casters you have to worry about outshining you is bard and wizard and its only outside of combat with a competent player

This is probably a dumb question, but where do I find rules for putting gear on my Necromancer's skellingtons?

>>52392348
It's a meme.
In combat, casters do the set-up, martials clean up. Sometimes the set-up is very effective (all enemies fail a save vs hypnotic pattern), sometimes the clean-up is (paladin smites away the boss on the first round), but the roles are pretty well defined. In 4e terms, Martials are Strikers (some build can hybrid Defend), Casters are Controllers/Leaders.
Out of combat, casters still more variety, and it only increases as they level up, while martials have to rely on skills and magic items.

>>52392387
They're exactly what you'd expect. The exact ports just with 5e rules.

I personally love Sunless Citadel and it's my go to level 1 adventure if most people there haven't played it.

>>52392402
Your DM

>>52392276
But then what's the point of punishing them for acting outside their alignment if you just put them as their new alignment so they shouldn't be punished for it?

It's 'Okay, I'm going to punish you but then your alignment will change after the fact?'
Which is really most punishing to people who keep switching between two alignments, which is probably harsh on morally grey characters.

>>52392452
Fair enough. Was hoping to have something to point to to show him. Has anyone done this? Does it break the game if I give my skellington chain and shield for 18 AC?

>>52392348
Aye, casters aren't going to out damage you. Casters at everything else? Probably. As long as they didn't spec evoker with a spell list of 'magic missile, chromatic orb, witch bolt' or something. In which case they're just useless.

If you care about combat worry about the Fighter absolutely outshining you at everything though.

>>52392476
This is why punishing people for acting against their alignments is stupid. Alignments are just a representation of their actions over time, ie characters who act predominantly lawful and good are lawful good aligned, characters who act predominantly chaotic and neither good nor evil are chaotic neutral etc. The only "punishment" should be if your LG character starts acting Evil, people will treat them like they're Evil.

>>52392514
As long as you kept it to a few skele's I can't see anything going wrong.

>>52392514
I dm SKT for a group that includes a necromancer. From my experience it doesn't break anything.

AOEs are still the most dangerous things for you skeletons. The most effective way to use them is giving them crossbows. Necromancer trade utility and control for dpr and the ability to easily block paths with his skeletons.

>>52392348
Depends.

1. Does your DM make you do the appropriate number of encounters in a day?
2. Does your DM ensure you can't just say 'fuck that' and rest at every opportunity?
3. Are you playing at very high levels?
4. Do out of combat problems often require special abilities to solve?
5. Does the DM not give the martials any interesting magical items/weapons/etc?
6. Does the DM shut down improvised actions?
7. Are the people playing casters really good and know what they're doing?
8. Does your DM allow bullshit to cover, say, a wizard's flaws by taking a level of cleric for up to +10 AC?
9. Does your DM play monsters like idiots and never break the spellcaster's concentration?
10. Does your DM run by base 'You heal 1 HP and then you're up again' rules?
11. Does your DM run moon druids as meatshields at certain levels?
12. Does your DM disallow feats?
13. Does your DM focus a lot on non-combat interaction?
14. Does your DM leave little to interact with in the environment in the first place including cover?

As a general thing, the more you say 'yes' to the more caster supremacy is a thing.

>>52392532
>>52392551
Thanks guys.

>>52392531
Then, there's no point to having players switch alignment. It does not actually do anything, therefore, it's merely a tag that loosely defines a player's idea of their character.

>>52392561
>2. Does your DM ensure you can't just say 'fuck that' and rest at every opportunity?
I think this hurts casters more. A Fighter and Rogue will always be the best when denied rests for a while, followed by Warlock and other Martials.

We've got Drow in the PHB, Svirfneblin in EE, and Deurgar in SCAG.

What other Underdark races should be playable?
Derro, Rockseer Elves, Kuo Toa, Grimlock, Quaggoth?

>>52392514
Skellingtons are crazy powerful if done right. The had parts are the set-up and keeping it away from authorities beating down upon you, and protecting your minions from AoEs.

Globe of invulnerability and counterspell and other spells can protect your minions from AoEs while you command your skeleton army to land 50 attacks per turn on your enemies from a distance, cucking the martials entirely.

File: sample_91caeb2c37191d356fe2ac22aa09d09c.jpg (227KB, 850x1451px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 850x1451px

>>52392348
For most of the game, martials are going to do much better in combat than casters.

Out of combat, and past mid-levels, casters are going to bend the game over their knee and call it a bitch, if the DM doesn't reign them in appropriately. And by Casters I mean Wizards and Sorcerers. I've seen it suggested a couple of other places to limit wizards to only two schools of magic and limit sorcerers to bloodline-appropriate spells, and I'm pretty eager to try this in my next game actually. As brutal of a nerf as it sounds, you have to consider each and every school of magic can warp reality and break the game in a way martials and half-casters usually can't even come close to, and forcing caster players to play a theme or a specialty is probably good for roleplaying anyway.

>>52392584
Right, yes, it should be 'Does your DM allow the wizards to just say 'fuck that' and rest whenever they want'

I might've slipped up somewhere else too because all the double negatives are getting to my head.

>>52392586
They need to add in fresh races soon as far as I'm concerned. Remaking old content is all good but I'd love to see some new stuff popping up and a new setting. Also if they ever do make a new setting with an Underdark, there better be Dark Halflings.

At this rate 5e is just a fixed 3.5e with nothing unique. Even though I do love the game.

>>52392616
>Sorcerers
>Good out of combat

They have fuck all for spells, and even less spell slots per day than a wizard if they use their metamagic on twinning and such, as well as not having truckloads of rituals like wizards get and having limited spell selection.

>>52392577
Yes, that's what alignment is. A tag that loosely defines a player's idea of the character.
That said, there are magic items that can only be attuned by people of certain alignments, and if you act Evil people will treat you like you're Evil, which can have consequences, but overall it's just a descriptor of the character's personality and actions.

File: 1484101635784.jpg (11KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 400x300px

>>52392616
But what if I pick a Lore Wizard and think sticking to one school is for fags

>>52392623
>At this rate 5e is just a fixed 3.5e with nothing unique.
That... was the point of the new edition, wasn't it?

>>52392619
Yeah, I really feel people need to stop the one hour work day by being better in character. I had a party and the Wizard always wanted to leave, rest and come back. I fixed it by saying that I'm not fucking around for a week and going in. Also I'm only sharing loot with people who follow me, so he sat outside, got no loot, no fun and no experience.

He now only asks we rest when he's low on juice and I'm happy to oblige.

>>52392599
I don't completely agree. It is true that Necromancer have really high dpr but you have almost no other spellslots for things like counterspelling left. And unlike most martials taking blows to your skeleton army does make you significantly weaker. The caster also needs multiple days to get to his full strenght again, and you can't make full use of your army in tight rooms or most dungeons. Ontop of that skeletons have a hard time hitting high AC targets, so you have to rely on their crits.

I say that the pros and cons balance each other out.

>>52392637
Does anyone NOT let sorcerers and wizards share spell lists? Aside from some of the difference being downright retarded (Only wizards get waterbreathing, but only sorcerers get waterwalk), it's a well-known fact that the sorcerer spell list is a straight downgrade from the wizard list in almost every respect.

>>52392660
Every edition up until had new content I believe. It's kinda getting stale seeing "One hundred adventures and races on the Sword Coast, coming out with 2 a year".

Seriously add in an adventure with a 20 page writing on a new setting in it and I'll buy it.

>>52392586
>What other Underdark races should be playable?

None of them. Enough with this "moar playable races" meme.

You do not need to be playing a new race. In fact most of these new races, do not need to exist at all. They are monsters. They are literal fucking demonspawn. They do not make for good characters. If you feel the need to play a KuoToa, a grimlock, a quaggoth, all of whom would probably kill each other on sight realistically, speaking, then I ask the question: why? Why do you need to play that? You don't. And it just puts more work on the DM to fit these together.

D&D is not Star Wars. You don't have a freakshow of 200 different races wandering around. It makes no fucking sense for every goddamn kingdom just about to be a new race of people. 90% of the people in the world, are human. Yes, human. Maybe less, and orcs being the second most numerous. After that? Halflings, some elves, some dwarves, some gnomes. After that? Maybe 0.1% of the surface world are the other races. And we're talking stuff the characters actually are allowed to play.

Don't get me wrong, sometimes it's cool to introduce the new party member as a gnoll member of the tribe the PCs are fighting who switches to their side because he has an actual moral compass. But, just piling on extra playable races to make up for this edition's otherwise-hollow chargen options? No thanks. You are playing wrong. Deal with it.

>>52392666
True, but sorcs still have fewer spells known than wizards can prepare.

>>52392685
I'd almost agree with you if the setting wasn't Faerun, which is entirely populated by snowflakes looking to throw off the oppressive label of their "evil" race.

>>52392685
This is pretty true. I think we already have every Forgotten Realms race that is reasonable to expect as an adventurer (I'd say they haven't done Gnolls yet but that isn't going to happen).

Any other cases of race are small things that will almost never be good or helpful and are pretty much something you should homebrew instead.

>>52392685
>hurr hurr only the races I like should be adventurers; none of the other races could possibly see any benefit in adventuring and getting treasure from other races

Boooooring.

If my party want to be gith spacejammer pirates that crashed into Faerun then that's what they'll get to be. You're just a huge faggot. Who cares if they introduce more races in splatbooks for people to play as? No one is forcing you to use them. You can just keep jerking off to the same old Human/Elf/Dwarf/Halfing LotR trite party endlessly if you want - doesn't mean anyone else is playing wrong.

>>52392721
>>52392733
Don't respond to this guy. He's prone to shitting up entire threads if you do.

File: 0537240435.png (127KB, 461x508px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 461x508px

Is Mystic OP?

File: 1426562939088.jpg (30KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 500x500px

>>52392763
Does it matter? It's a stupid class that makes less thematically than Monks.

In before retards wank about Dark Sun

>>52392763
If you blow all your daily resources it can slaughter a dragon pretty fast
It also has a lot of versatility
Still not wizard/bard tier

>>52392663
How is it being better in character to want to risk your life?

Unless your character has a death wish, it is clearly much, much better to head in, nuke everything, go outside and rest. Anything else is pushing yourself until you put yourself in danger of death.

As such, you need things that curb this behaviour from the DM:
>Entry fees
>Respawns
>Dungeon development and trap laying where adventurers are expected to be

>>52392666
It still doesn't help a lot, but it's honestly something that should have been done considering it's simpler than trying to make a special sorcerer list.

However, the sorcerer list does make it easier for new players to browse their spells. That's what sorcerer is - Wizard Easy Mode for new players.

>>52392763
Resources keep me grounded.

>>52392763
Pretty shitty desu. Some of the higher level abilities are pretty good, but they're essentially a crappier bard/rogue/wizard substitute. If you already have one in the party, they're undershadowed, and if you don't have one in the party, they'd be better than a Mystic.

>>52392763
Some combos are (Animate Weapon?), but in general? Not really.
It's different, but not broken.

When will Violet Fungus be a playable race?

File: Pokémon_Abra,_Kadabra,_Alakazam_art.png (123KB, 369x311px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 369x311px

>>52392763
The way it's intended, it's not OP. However it's written so horribly that there are a million ways to exploit it.

And while not necessarily OP, it's a pain in the dick to deal with as a DM, particularly the part where their abilities never have any components and can't be counter-spell'd because they're not spells. (They also bypass any magic-defenses that specify SPELLS like Abjurationist's later-level abilities.)

Also psychic powers is shit that belongs in scifi and Pokemon, not DnD.

>>52392804
How sun sensible would it be?

File: b1d61b0b65071c5cdfeba0cf94d960bc.jpg (68KB, 736x817px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 736x817px

>>52392763

They seem like babies first homebrew.

"ohh you have this resource! that you can use! that you can make yourself into like an animal! but youre not a real animal, like not furry n stuff, but you can make yourself claws that go SHAAAH! and like you can talk to peoples minds and you can like use jedi powers n stuff! omg and like youre not a stupid wizard you can actually like use armor n stuff and have a cool sword! omg and you can make people be your friends even if they dont want to! and everyone has to do what you say!"

It is retarded desu.

>>52392781
>How is it being better in character to want to risk your life?
My guy's a sellsword. Someone is paying me money to get the mcguffin and I know we can get it without the Wizard because without him we still have me a Fighter, a Rogue, a Druid and a Warlock. So why would we spend a week waiting for him when we can do it in a day and move on to the next job? More money in less time that way.

If there's out of character reason to get it done (Which any player can find one) and you're all very burst happy long rest characters then it makes sense. But a paladin that spends 90% of his time sitting on his ass doing nothing and 10% fighting evil isn't a very good Paladin.

>>52392685
I agree with this anon, this shit has to stop.

>>52392825
This... just sounds like a Druid.

Am I the only one who tries to make a character around miniatures that I have?

>>52392839
I'd like a pseudo-werebeast Druid subclass.

Alright, anons, how will Mearls disappoint us today?

>>52392839
This

Moon druids get Alter self at will in higher levels

>>52392839

Druids cant use swords. (anything made out of metal)
And they are furry.

>>52392862
Last I checked druids could use metal weapons

>>52391815
>What do players think of 5e?
I like it generally, it's simple enough for new players like me.

But a lot of it feels like it got missed off along the way.

Stealth needs clearer mechanics in relation to hiding, advantage, etc. (what requires rolls? What doesn't? Do you need to roll to hide behind cover but not when you're in Darkness?).

Why are there so few useful non-martial feats?

Does Swashbuckler's anti-Opportunity Attack ability get countered by the Sentinel feat?

Why is Wizard so insanely powerful with more customisation options than any other class?

It's good, but frequently my group runs into things that needs homeruling.

>>52392830
You can't put the genie back in the bottle, anon. Ever since 3.0/3.5 splatbooks unearthed a metric fuckton of playable races, and even sets of books dedicated to turning any and all monsters into player races (Savage Species, Unearthed Arcan, etc), people have gone hog fucking wild. And because people want to "identify" with something, like a race or a class, the more options, the better for them. 5E pared down a lot of shit, but adding Tiefling and Dragonborn as core races and then sprinkling in birdmen and other dumb shit shows that WotC knows what these memeloving fucks want.

You're just going to have to deal with it, or worship Zarus and go full 1488.

>>52392827
>A Week
Assuming they're using those rules. Though, those rules are not used as often as they should be.

Druids have spell slots too, and if both the druid and the wizard want to rest then what're you going to do, go in without anything but martials and a sort-of-caster?

If your character doesn't expect there to be a lot of danger inside, sure, but if you know it's filled with monsters you're putting your life at risk due to being a bit impatient. Your character would have to have about 8 wisdom to make that make sense, and everybody else would have to lack the wisdom or charisma to tell you how stupid that is.

A paladin that preserves his life to further smite evil than to keep pressing on and put his life in danger and potentially cut his smiting life short is still as valid as a paladin in the long run.

File: heresy.jpg (142KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 400x400px

Threadly reminder that people who say Dexterity is better than Strength because Dexterity gives AC are liars.

>>52392877

Had to recheck
Youre right. They cant wear ARMOR or shields made out of metal, but apparently giant swords made in the depths of hell are fine.

>>52392068
Warlock Patrons are pretty cool. Some of the Rogue stuff is alright.

Lore Master is great for turning into a Sorcerer buff.

>>52392881
Stealth is pretty clear. Are you trying to hide? Roll for it. You should still roll to hide even in Darkness if you're not retarded, because enemies have Darkvision et al but not (usually) X-ray vision.

Feats are entirely optional.

PCs are not supposed to fight and enemy monsters are not statted as PCs, so it shouldn't come up. This one is definitely unclear but because it should never come up.

The company is called Wizards of the Coast, not Rogues of the Coast. Wizards are the pet favorite.

>>52392899
But they're not. Dex used to be the god stat and is only slightly less the god stat now that many races let you use your primary stat for other stuff too.

>>52392902
It's just a sword why not

>>52392881
>Does swashbuckler get countered by sentinel?
Absolutely nothing says it does. Anything else is houseruling, but it's fine to say that it does.

>Wizard so powerful with more customization?
Compared to bard, it doesn't get truckloads of skills and actually has less customization when you consider the spells they have access to. It's just wizard has more spells in total.
Compared to bard, they can't turn themselves into a big fucking meatshield at every corner.
Unlike warlock or fighter or so forth, they don't normally have reliable long-term damage.
Compared to barbarian, they don't take a lot of damage.

Wizards are high skillcap, however, and with great out of combat abilities they're very effective, but only when played by a player who knows what they're doing.

>Why are these so few useful non-martial feats?
Because weapon feats shouldn't exist. They're all compulsory feats or useless. Once you remove them and give martials a compensation, it's more balanced.

Once you understand stealth, your question is answered. You only roll to hide behind cover or in darkness when you take the HIDE action. Otherwise, you are not hiding. And then if you walk out into sight, you'll no longer be hidden. But if you pop out and immediately attack, you'll get advantage.
I'll admit though, the rules aren't very clear, it took me a long time to understand it.

There's a lot of oddities about 5e where it somehow gets oddly complicated and confusing, but it's easy to houserule in.

>>52392348
Wizards are a step above everything else because WoTC have a dumb boner for them, but all the others are on an equal footing with martials.

But even wizards aren't too powerful, just objectively better than other casters.

>>52392889
If both the casters want to rest we would. I'm talking about people who fight one fight, blow a huge fucking load and then want to rest.

You don't need to super smite an Orc just because you crit, he's would've been dead anyway. We're fighting 5 enemies and the Wizard casts fireball even though cantrips and attacks could've handled it. 4 bandits attack out heavily armoured 5 person party? Maybe the Druid didn't need to Wildshape right away.

If people want to wank over their power fantasy it's fine. If the whole party is playing characters like that then it can be fun even. If the minority are doing shit like that then there's no reason for us to stay with an obnoxious douche and no reason for him to share treasure of he feels he does the work.

It's a team game and if everyone plays to their strengths you can go ages without rests. The Wizard should nuke encounters, but the rest of the time swords and cantrips can handle shit.

>>52392899
>Be Inmortal Mystic
>High Con and Dex
>Go into battle in bathrobes.

>>52392899
Strength is only useful for PAM and reckless attack/rage damgae on barbarian and grapple/shoving and carrying more stuff and +1 AC on heavy armour classes.
That's literally it.

>>52392886
To be honest, as the original asker, I was more wondering about games set in the Underdark.

Especially as sources of new PCs when the old ones fall in one of the sunless seas, or gets feasted on by Mind Flayers.

>>52392881
Wizard(the class) appeals to the player that wants to feel smart or clever while playing. All the options a Wizard has makes it easy to feel like you have all the solutions in game because you are so smart, when in actuality you just use character options like all other players, but you have a lot more of them.

The people who make the game are probably nerds like all of us, so when playtesting they probably feel like when "they" play a wizard, they solved a problem/encounter/trap easily because they played "smart", and noone thinks to nerf the Wizard.

>>52392020
Frankly, the edgy Paladin focus was shit and frankly would just encourage and enable That Guy.

You know what we could do with?

A current setting specific Oath and a Metal as fuck Oath for a to be released setting.

Oath of the Arcane Order for Knights of Mystra. (An accompanying Ranger Conclave of the Shooting Stars would be cool.

And.

Oath of Bones. For Eberron relaunch give unto us the Karnathi Bone Knight!

I kinda want to do a 3 or less dip in Mystic for more psychic shenanigans as a GOOlock (Since GOOlock doesn't have as much as I'd like) but haven't actually looked at Mystic much.

Would this be unbalanced like a 1 dip in Shadow Sorc or nah? I don't want to end up being a powergaming fuckwit.

>>52392781
>How is it being better in character to want to risk your life?
Why would people even be adventurers if they don't want to risk their lives?>>52392815
>Also psychic powers is shit that belongs in scifi and Pokemon, not DnD.
Oh, it's this nonsense argument again.
>>52392899
>Telling the truth is lying now
And it's not just that it gives AC. It's that it gives AC, can be used to attack with ranged weapons in addition to many melee weapons, has more skills associated with it AND is a strong save.

>>52392757
>If my party want to be gith spacejammer pirates that crashed into Faerun then that's what they'll get to be.

If they want to jerk off onto your face, then do you let them do that, too?

> Boooooring.

No, that's you and your inability to roleplay without some tacky collection of 400 demonspawn races meant for snowflakes.

>>52392920
>You should still roll to hide even in Darkness if you're not retarded,
>because enemies have Darkvision

Magical Darkness, friend, darkvision doesn't apply. Enemies who are "blinded" have disadvantage to hit and you have advantage against them, which is essentially the same as hiding. What's the advantage of hiding as well, at the cost of a (bonus) action?

Or if you don't need to hide then, why do you need to hide when you're behind a wall? That's what I don't understand. I can see it if you're partially hidden, but if you're behind something, I don't get it.

>>52392965
Dwarves that burrowed too deep are okay, and I think there's some meme race of halflings that live close.

Frankly my favorite race is Imaskarii and I use them for Underdark shit, even though Deep Imaskar isn't the UD - it's PROBABLY close enough.

>>52392899
>>52392964
This is why Deadly Agility should have been a feat.

>>52392899
>Str lets you use PAM and/or GWM
>And those Warlock Smite weapons from UA, they are all Str based (the bow is obviously Dex)
>for everything else, why wouldn't you use Dex instead
>or your spellcasting mod, with shillelagh or as an hexblade

>>52392984
>Would this be unbalanced
Yes, UA is explicitly not balanced for multiclassing.

>>52392249
As a player who has a high functioning teenage grill as another player in our store game, just help them with what they don't understand, make clear what's appropriate and inappropriate at the table, and encourage them to listen and observe the cues they have otherwise had difficulty identifying.

Don't make expectations about what they know and talk to them about what can be To accommodate the things they know they have trouble with.

>>52392984
Mystic skyrockets at 3rd.

File: IMG_0391.jpg (87KB, 1200x915px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1200x915px

What race and class is the best for producing a DnD version of Rorschach. I went with Tiefling as far as race goes.

>>52392984
It is undeniably "power gaming fuckwit" territory, yeah.

>>52392998
There are things that can still see even in Magical Darkness, like the Warlock's infernal sight.

Also, being behind a wall isn't the same as hiding. Anyone on the OTHER side of that wall is just looking at some asshole standing in front of a wall. A real rogue is paranoid about being seen from above, below, the sides, etc.

Hiding is ALWAYS worth the action.

>>52392987
>can be used to attack with ranged weapons in addition to many melee weapons, has more skills associated with it AND is a strong save.

Those are legit arguments for dex being better. When Strength characters start with higher AC than dex characters and stay like that for their entire adventuring career, the AC is not an argument for dex being better than strength.

>>52392902
I like to think they require their weapons to have wooden handles.

>>52392998
>which is essentially the same as hiding.
Except not. If you're hidden, people can't target you with attacks, because they don't know you're there. If they can't see you, they can still attack you because they know you're there, just not precisely. There are more senses than just vision, remember.

>>52392990
there's nothing more "archetypal" or whatever about the default races, they were only added as a popularity grab since they were from popular fiction at the time

>>52393037
Human rogue.

>>52393037
>What race and class is the best for producing a human rogue that thinks he's a Paladin?
>I chose demonic edgelord rapebaby

I see.

Human Rogue.

>>52392953
There's nothing "objectively better" about the most fragile caster class. Druids and bard for example are better if you want versatility.

>>52392348
Caster supremacy is based off people who are still traumatized over 3e, its not a thing in 5e at all.

File: IMG_0401.jpg (67KB, 628x310px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 628x310px

>>52393068
I just figured since they're so orcastrized already it'd help with the fucked up childhood factor.

>>52392951
>>52392920

>Does swashbuckler get countered by sentinel?
>Absolutely nothing says it does.

See, I didn't think so either, but Sentinel says:
>"Creatures provoke opportunity attacks from you even if they take the Disengage action before leaving your reach."

The rest of my party argues that it's the "even" that puts it into doubt, because it makes it sound like in any case, OppAttacks still apply. It came up because my Rogue and our Barbarian had a brief disagreement over targets in a battle. It was cool and everything, but we weren't sure.

>>52393043
Yeah, the seeing through magical darkness is why it's come up. I have Darkness+Devil's Sight, and am a multiclass with Rogue, but we're not sure whether to roll to hide or not (assuming no Truevision/Blindsight on enemies). Is it just up to me in order to counter against potential true/blind? As in, I get to take the risk against the hope that it counts towards enemies being effectively blinded?

You can't hide from someone that can see you anyway. So if I'm on the other side of a wall from all the enemies, am I not hidden? This is what's complicated. They either see me or they don't see me, assuming I'm not moving. It only makes sense in partial cover.

>>52393094
Hell yah another Druid guy. I thought they all left after autism wizard

>>52393094
>It's not a thing at all as long as the DM bans them from going infinite off Simulacrum ha ha

Nice meme.

>>52392616
What's the appeal for shitting on people's fun? Were you a pushover DM?

This is a kind of off-topic question but -
Under the classic 3x3 alignment chart that D&D uses, where exactly does the benevolent despot fall? By benevolent despot I basically mean someone who

- is not interested in democracy and the people's rights, at least at the moment - maybe he just doesn't believe it works, maybe he thinks the masses are too stupid to be trusted with themselves or maybe he just thinks society isn't stable enough to sustain it
- is willing to be ruthless and take the "sadistic choice"
- isn't really concerned with righteousness as long as things get done
- is legitimately looking out for his country and his people, not for his own power or profit, but might fight to preserve his power if he thinks he's the only one able to get things done
- tries to follow the laws and keep to the standards he expects others to follow

I'm not playing a character like this but I was in a game a few months ago and the alignment of an NPC presented like this turned into an argument, with some players saying it was LE, others LN, and others still LG.

>>52393111
>>It's not a thing at all as long as the DM bans them from going infinite off Simulacrum ha ha

Oh goody, "shit that never happened" stories.

How many 5e campaigns have you been in?
Of those, what % got to level 17?
Of those, what % had a wizard?
Of those, what % wanted to break the game by Crawfordian simulacrum nonsense?
Of those, what % of DMs said "hell yeah, I like this Crawfordian simulacrum nonsense" and approved that interpretation?

>>52393112
In a good team-based game, every class has weaknesses and strength. This allows for multiple players to cover eachothers weaknesses with their strengths.

In a poorly-designed game, one calss can do everything and doesn't really need the other characters or makes them strictly inferior choices.

In DnD 5e, after mid-level, Wizard is the later. Either you limit them in some way, or they bypass every encounter and obstacle in the game with a couple of spells.

>>52393031
Probably best to avoid it then, I was mostly interested in the longer range GOOtelepathy and the level 3 Awakened item detective ability.

>>52393106
You would provoke, sure, but they can't make those attacks anyway.
The rule interaction is quite clear.

>>52393106
>You can't hide from someone that can see you anyway

Can and Does are two very different things. There are lots of abilities as well (Halfling, Elf, etc) that let you hide behind other people, or THE FUCKING RAIN (Mask of the Wild is so good), so frankly, if you can make an attempt to hide, do so. I do it as a habit at this point because my DM has all kinds of invisible enemies/scrying assholes, etc. They're going to have to make a Perception check and beat my Stealth.

Just being on a wall away from the enemies is NOT hiding. Hiding is actively ensuring you are not detected by others. A fighter standing on another side of a wall isn't Hiding or suddenly a rogue. Hiding may involve pushing yourself flat up against the wall or holding a cloak that looks like the wall in front of yourself or doing some meme ninja shuffle, etc.

>>52392757
Bad form, good sir. Gith pirates fall to the merciless talents of a Giff lead Stellar forced, I say.

>>52393145
Lawful Neutral.

>>52393145

#1 can be any alignment.
#2 is easily evil.
#3 is probably neutral or evil.
#4 can be any alignment.
#5 is probably, probably lawful.

So lawful evil, most assuredly. Ruthless, sadistic rulers that follow the law seem to be garden variety LE types (other than that some people think that being a ruler makes you lawful, so that an evil ruler could only be LE by definition).

>>52393148
11.

Some of them STARTED at 15, 17 or 20. 7 of the games allowed me to go off with Simulacrum. I don't want to calculate the percentile.

100%.

100%.

100%.

(I was the wizard, every time. My DMs are very hardline about RAW.)

>>52393160
>You would provoke, sure, but they can't make those attacks anyway.
I don't follow. Though I do myself believe Sentinel shouldn't be able to counter the Swashbuckler ability, it's just my party that find it vague.

>>52393171
Is it though? The argument I heard against that is that while the guy's means are Evil and his goal is Good, he has literally nothing going for him on the Neutral axis.

>>52393175
>#4
But his goal is flat out Good isn't it? He doesn't care about his own power and prestige, he just wants to make his country a better place. That's where the dilemma popped up, because he's heavily Evil when it comes to means but he's heavily Good when it comes to ends.

>sadistic rulers
The Sadistic Choice means they're willing to take the "yes, the entire third army is just bait and will probably be wiped out but this will win the war faster and save more people in the long run" option. It doesn't mean they're actually sadistic, sorry for being unclear.

>>52393106
>During your turn, if you make a melee attack against a creature, that creature cannot make opportunity attacks against you for the rest of your turn.

You may be leaving threatened squares and triggering the option of an Opportunity Attack, but Fancy Footwork specifically says they may not take Opportunity Attacks of any kind. The option is closed to you, even if otherwise you'd be able to do so.

>>52393169
So it is a case of "rogue's choice"? That's fine. For me, it's generally a better move to use the bonus action for an attack or some such. Haven't had any issues with enemies seeing through it yet, and I can skip out on Opportunity Attack danger and stuff.

>>52393210
LE.

Just because you don't care about power/prestige/etc and think you want to make your country a better place does not mean that you are right (even if you are) or that you have any moral entitlement or permission to make these "improvements".

You're essentially Doctor Doom. Doom is egotistical but he truly believes he's making the world a better place and that he's the ONLY one that can do so.

File: 57116aca433fcb051a67ee35fdda4b62.jpg (193KB, 920x675px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 920x675px

Has anyone played the sea sorcerer from the Ua? Seems like it could be fun. Here's my idea.

>sea sorcerer, goo tome lock triton
>tome for ritual casting utility
>curse with agonizing eldritch blast for easy multi-hit cursing
>typical sorlock quickened eb spam for damage
>pick some cool water and lightning based spells for flavor, lightning bolt, gust, etc
>goo lock and sea sorcerer fit really well together for some "cryptic deep dweller Lovecraft innsmouth" sort of shit

Thoughts?

>>52393157
Follow the guidelines on encounter-per-day, and it's ok.
If you don't, it's your fault - the Wizard's resources take in account an average of 6 to 8 encounters per day, ofc they are broken if you only do 3 or 4!

>>52393157
>In a poorly-designed game, one calss can do everything and doesn't really need the other characters or makes them strictly inferior choices.

But one class can't do everything. If there was that class, it would be the moon druid or perhaps a mutant lore bard. Wizards need martials unbelievably more than martials need wizards.

If there is one class everyone needs, its the paladin.

>or they bypass every encounter and obstacle in the game with a couple of spells.

Nah.

>>52393182

>Some of them STARTED at 15, 17 or 20.

Sounds pretty pathetic.

File: all hope lost.jpg (80KB, 766x960px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 766x960px

>>52393232
A class that's capable of everything unless you defeat them through sheer attrition is not a fun way to balance a game. It blows my mind people actually defend this sort of game-design.

>>52393217
Pretty much, yes. I view it like this

- If the rogue claims he's making an attempt to hide and he does so, he's hidden. Anyone who wants to look for him must make a Perception check/search for him/use magic/etc.

- If the rogue is behind cover or no one is looking at him/aware he's there, he's technically hidden as well, but as in the wall example, someone who strolls along on the SAME SIDE of the wall that the Rogue is, will be able to see him, because he is not hiding. If the rogue WAS hiding, then that man would need a Perception check to uncover him.

I find that DMs will eventually start spotting you with inconvenient guard patrols/familiars/etc if you fuck their ass too hard with "free" Hidden status so I always just make sure I'm hiding anyways to prevent any unpleasant surprise.

>>52393223
I guess so.
Honestly never liked how Good-Evil gets split in D&D, I always thought that changing good-evil into selfless-selfish and benevolent-malevolent made more sense, along with lawful-chaotic being split into moral-amoral (i.e. personal code) and ethical-unethical (i.e. common laws)

>>52393232
>LOL, I just hide in my pocket dimension until my spells recharge. Don't tell me I can't though, you're a shit DM who cheats if you do that!

>>52393250
>bad
>wrong
>fun

>>52393252
Anon even if you were to nerf wizards down to their specialized schools a Necromancer is going to blow everyone the fuck out with his army of skellingtns

>>52393239
>Wizards need martials unbelievably more than martials need wizards.

kek

Yeah, because the martials are going to bypass all that DR/resistances that require magical weapons or spells without them. Unless you hope Daddy DM will just GIVE you magical items because you "deserve" them.

I agree though that Bard and Paladin are the two strongest classes that pretty much don't need anyone.

>>52393225
Multiclassing UA/10

>>52393182
>Wizards break the game
>I was the wizard
Sounds like you are That Guy in your table

>>52393277
Look out guys that wizard has like 4 whole CR 1/4 monsters with him!

>>52393280
Wizards shine outside of combat, and the problem with that is that they can usually bypass 75% of normal encounters just by repeatedly spamming their godhood outside of combat.

My players have an item that I don't want to figure out the properties of, but one of them is taking Identify next level. I know I fucked up by not accounting for Identify, but we are past that.

How do I disrupt this so they can't figure out what this item does for now? Am I allowed to say they aren't powerful enough to figure it out? because that is probably what I will do

>>52393266
The problem is that ethos is cultural in nature and what you perceive to be ethical and what an orc perceives to be ethical are not the same by any measure. The same thing gets fucked up when you get into the philosophical concept of "selflessness" - it literally cannot exist.

>>52392763
Not at all the whining about the class froms alty wizard and cleric players. It chews through it resources super quickly and it's version of cantrips are shit.

>>52393277
The army of skeletons is counterable by AOE's and undead-killing abilities in general. Which is fine. It's the way the game SHOULD work. Classes should have things they're good at and things they're bad at. It's almost like it'd be a healthy thing for a TEAM-BASED GAME.

>>52393298
>Wizards break the game
Wizards are already unbelieveably nerfed from their 3.PF days. It's time to lay off, maybe buff the martials so they can do things outside of combat in a way that makes sene.

>>52393274
You phrase that like the DM would need to make it a house ruling, when that is not really necessary.

Pocket Dimensions only last 1 hour don't they?

It wouldn't work because RAW and I don't think that anon was suggesting what you greentexted at all.

>>52392987
>>Also psychic powers is shit that belongs in scifi and Pokemon, not DnD.
>Oh, it's this nonsense argument again.
This psionics have been part of DnD since 1st ed

So, we have a SKT game coming up and one of our players is going to do a deep stalker ranger.
I got an idea to do a rogue1/deepstalkerX goblin sidekick, sort of a Igor to Frankenstein type of master-servant relationship.

Is this entirely retarded or feasible?
How the fuck should I go about building this little fucker?

>>52393266
Objective morality is stupid, news at 11.

Ultimately, you gotta remember that what constitutes 'good' in D&D settings is merely what the 'good' gods say, and they are fallible beings.

>>52393210
>But his goal is flat out Good isn't it?

Why on earth would that matter? At all? Everyone's goals are "good" on some level.

>He doesn't care about his own power and prestige, he just wants to make his country a better place.

If wanting power and prestige made you Eviller, then PCs would be fucked. How much you value yourself isn't a relevant component, just what you do.

>That's where the dilemma popped up, because he's heavily Evil when it comes to means but he's heavily Good when it comes to ends.

In that regard he is like every fucking evil dictator under the sun.

>>52393351
That doesn't make them a good addition. I ban psionics from all my games.

>>52393274
He's not wrong.

He can do that, but time still passes outside the pocket dimension. While he was holed up recharging his spellslots and playing with his onahole, the lich razed the kingdom and burned all the spellbooks, etc. You don't need to break the rules or go NUH UH to players using mechanics the way they were intended to best them.

>>52393298
Moving goalposts at this point. He's claiming something never happened because he plays in Rusty Dagger Shankton Level 1-5 pleb games and never deals with the high octane stuff. As soon as someone else does, he's That Guy or bad, even though everyone had a shitload of fun at the table when I played with them and literally no one griped.

>>52392959
Even so, if you then have 2 nuke characters and 2 non-nuke characters and the nuke characters just nuke the first thing they see, it doesn't work out. The DM has to monitor it a bit with proper moderation.

>>52392987
>If they didn't want to risk their lives
Sure, they might want to risk their lives, but would you rather have a 80% chance of death or a 40% chance of death? In both cases you're risking your life, but you probably want to live to the end of it.

>>52393106
Yeah. It really shouldn't crop up, because you shouldn't be fighting enemies with sentinel often.
Considering the mobile feat is also in the PHB and some enemies have abilities such as 'flyby', I would assume they're either writing it poorly or it is intended that abilities such as flyby still ignore sentinel.

A quick trip to google
http://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/01/10/sentinel-feat-vs-fancy-footwork-and-mobile-feat/
Shows that anything aside from disengage will still avoid it.

>>52393351
You're aware the pokemon-comparison is a shitty meme meant to booty-bother newfags, right?

[Spoiler]Also the fact that it was spoiler is kinda like putting :^) in your post.

>>52393277

Nobody said anything about "badwrongfun." Bringing up game balance while referencing softball campaigns with meek, pushover DMs is not relevant.

>>52393356
Deepstalker X is stepping on his toes too much. Deepstalker 1/Rogue X is the way to go. Use your partner as Concealement; hide under his cloak or on his back like Master Blaster in Beyond Thunderdome and make nasty fucking sneak attacks with handcrossbows.

>>52393291
>>52393225
Fug I forgot about that. Okay well it works mostly the same with draconic I suppose.

>>52393326
I was merely paraphrasing what he was saying. I agree, wizards are fine now. If anybody needs a change, it's martials. They need more flashy moves and out of combat stuff.

>>52393280

>Yeah, because the martials are going to bypass all that DR/resistances that require magical weapons or spells without them.

Yup.

>Unless you hope Daddy DM will just GIVE you magical items because you "deserve" them.

Magic items aren't a variant rule I'm afraid.

>>52393382
>DMs that allow their players to reach high levels and then don't ban all the cool high level stuff are pushovers

You sound like a fag honestly

>>52393367
Sure do wish any of the other players even had choices like hiding in their dimensional ona-hole. But just because the evil guy gets a few hours of downtime to wreak havoc (instead of having just KILLED the hero like he would have with any other class), it's totally fair and balanced.

Arguing with wizard fanboys is like trying to convince /v/ you actually enjoyed something.

>>52393326

The answer to "wish simulacrum" is to throw simulacrum in the garbage, not buff up everyone else so they can compete with infinite power.

>>52393318
>ethos is cultural in nature
Well yeah that's my point. The Moral-Amoral axis would be "I have a personal code of honor etc." so a monk would have to be 100% Moral - but not necessarily Ethical, because the religon's teachings are not always the same as the King's Law. Meanwhile a cop is probably going to be Ethical but not necessarily Moral - he'll follow and enforce the law but he might not have a hard code of his own.

>"selflessness"
In the sense of "freedom" vs. "control", I mean.

>>52393362
>Why on earth would that matter? At all? Everyone's goals are "good" on some level.
Because I'm not sure there's any way to construe "a higher standard of living, more efficient law enforcement, less corruption, and overall ability to get more of what the people want to more of the people faster" as bad in any way.

>In that regard he is like every fucking evil dictator under the sun.
I mean...not according to the handbook's version of LE which is basically a comic book evil emprah who simply uses the law to crush everyone under his bot.

>>52393358
>Ultimately, you gotta remember that what constitutes 'good' in D&D settings is merely what the 'good' gods say, and they are fallible beings.

There is no indication post 1e (which ran on sujbective morality by word of Gygax) that gods determine what is good and evil, in any edition, ever.

>>52393410
No one said they were a variant rule. There's also no rule that says "DM MUST GIVE THE FIGHTER HIS MAGIC +1 TENDIES AT THIS LEVEL FOR BEING A GOOD BOY". The players are not entitled to magical items, nor can they just buy them. It's literally up to the DM's whim as to if they get them, when, etc.

>>52393425
Not him but while I generally ban very little, simulacrum is always at the top of that list.
That spell is just obviously retarded.

>>52393430
>fair and balanced

See, that's your mistake already. Balance is boring as shit. There's nothing more boring than making everyone equal.

>>52393425
>reach

1. You're not reaching shit, you're being handed omnipotence out the gate and then shitting up a tg thread by saying "well, I was handed free unlimited power, therefore this is relevant."
2. Banning one particularly retarded spell is not "banning all the cool high level stuff."

>>52393252
We're all playing this game, aren't we?
Wizards are only as powerful as their resources, their spells per day. Not per encounter, per day.
Fuck up on the encounters per day, and you've broken a delicate balance.

We can talk about making all casters per-encounter casters, like the warlock, now that would be a great idea, but that's not what we're playing with right now.

>>52393470
There's also nothing more boring than one option clearly being superior than every other option in almost every scenario.

>>52393476
I'm still waiting for the day a wizard runs out of spell slots and gets trapped under a portcullis without their fighter around

>>52393441
>Because I'm not sure there's any way to construe "a higher standard of living, more efficient law enforcement, less corruption, and overall ability to get more of what the people want to more of the people faster" as bad in any way

Increased standards of living and available health care/goods/etc increases the population exponentially until you're now dealing with an overpopulation crisis. What's the moral choice now? Spread through the plane filling it up until you're out of room? Limit people's personal freedom to prevent a tipping point? Sanctioned killings? I disagree that those goals are fundamentally good - they're creature comforts.

>>52393387
He's also going the ranged route and I felt that would've stepped on his toes aswell, so I was planning on having the rogue as melee.

I'd love to get the 3rd level Deep Stalker trait though since it gives me +10 movement speed and an additional attack on that turn, which makes for a pretty good stealth opener. Would Stalker3/RogueX work?

Never going to get another attack anyway so that's the only way I can think of to raise my damage a bit as it's a pseudo-attack.

>>52392951
>Because weapon feats shouldn't exist. They're all compulsory feats or useless. Once you remove them and give martials a compensation, it's more balanced.
Example of something you'd give martials instead of weapon feats?

>>52393475
Regardless if someone grinded up to level 20 and then used the spell or if the campaign started at that level and they took the spell is no different at all. And yes, banning a cool high level spell is still the same as banning a cool high level thing. Just because you get booty blasted and have no idea how to deal with it doesn't mean it shouldn't exist. Why not ban everything you don't like?

>>52393441
>as bad in any way.

Nor should you.

>I mean...not according to the handbook's version of LE which is basically a comic book evil emprah who simply uses the law to crush everyone under his bot.

That's *your* definition of LE. Not the book's. The book would definitely allow for far nicer LE types than a ruthless person who doesn't mind doing "sadistic things."

>Lawful evil (LE) creatures methodically take what they want, within the limits of a code of tradition, loyalty, or order.

Simply put, he does ruthless and sadistic things with his power and doesn't care about the people's rights and is therefore undeniably, 100% Evil, no filter, and -- as a quite nice contrast -- obeys the Law and does it for a purpose. So... Lawful Evil.

>>52393453
What does determine whether an act is good or evil in the standard 5e setting? I've been trying to find this, but haven't been able to.

>>52393476
This is a problem with the mechanics themselves though. Any party that has a few casters in it is going to agree to stop and camp for the night to rest so they can recover their spells, because why wouldn't they?

And if you constantly harangue the players at night while they're trying to sleep with all these retarded night assaults, it's obvious you're just assmad that they're gaming the system - but the system ENCOURAGES them to do so with the way resources are handled.

>>52393523
He didn't say he wasn't banning "a" cool high level thing, he said he wasn't banning "all" cool high level things, which is what you said.
Stop shifting goalposts. Stop posting too while you're at it.

>>52393454

Making the wild assumption the DM will hold back on fighters is an odd basis to argue that wizards are da bestest, especially considering the implication was that fighters "need" wizards for magic items, when even if there is a wizard, he's not likely to be using his concentration slot magicking up the fighter.

>Immortal gets perma-advantage on grapples
Mite b cool.

Hey mathfaggots, is advantage statistically better than expertise or nah?

>>52393567
It's not shifting a goalpost at all. Either everything is okay or nothing is. If he thinks Simulacrum is unbalanced and bans it, then why is he leaving in Wish? Why isn't he banning any of the other spells that can go infinite? He just has a hateboner ONLY for Simulacrum?

The crux of the argument is basically "I want to ban this because I can't handle it".

>>52393438
It's not simulacrum I'm talking about, it's the fact that outside of combat casters have a significant advantage in the number of things to DO. Not that fighters can't do anything outside of combat but that casters have more mechanics for doing thngs. As an example of something to add - Fighters shouldn't be fighters anymore. The original concept of a Fighter was literally just the class where you used swords instead of fireballs or longbows. As time wore on, everyone else got more specific branches and flavor and stuff, but the Fighter remains just the guy with a pointy stick. Split the class in two - have one side be Knight and the other side remain Fighter. Knight gets a few druid / ranger like abilities to control rideable animals, special feats and abilities for mounted combat, and can act as a tank second to the paladin. They might have social graces outside of combat and limited commander / buffing powers. The Fighter gets some Rogue powers to track enemies. He can bind wounds and knows the basics of wild herbs to treat himself. He'd know how to cover someone's flank and get a bonus in duel-like situations where he has to demonstrate his strength under controlled circumstances, etc. It's not about buffing, it's about adding things to do so that you're more than the man with a stick. Every other class is more specific - clerics are monks with cool blasting rods, wizards are geeks who can bend reality, paladins are basically deus vult righteous champions, rangers are park rangers, rogues are robin hood, barbarians are Ivar Bloodhand. Fighters are just...bland.

>>52393500
You'll find that overpopulation / famine crises a-la Malthus has never been a thing in history EXCEPT when the base of production suddenly drops out from under the society, like the potato famine, cultural revolution, or a prolonged war. Fertility is not constant with standards of living.

>>52393562
>because why wouldn't they?
Plot pressure. They just won't have time, or if they do there wasn't anything really important to do anyway.

BTW, that's why I like the 'longer rests' variant. so they can't just sleep a night in the open and recover spells.

File: 15453412.jpg (26KB, 500x400px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 500x400px

Anon please help me make a good blade lock. I have tried and i am about to kill myself because this is literally impossible.

>>52393587
If you don't have the ability to hit what you are attacking then it doesn't matter how many times you reroll, you know.

Statistics>logic.

>>52393602
>Either everything is okay or nothing is.
Why?
Why not just ban the one spell that is obviously the most poorly balanced and thought out in the entire game?
Do you really not see the difference between that and banning everything?

>>52393581
It's not a wild assumption. This is secretly the real reason lots of people play casters. Lots of other classes RELY on DM charity in order to be effective. You can argue that a DM can go out of their way to bust the casters' balls with antimagic fields/stealing spellbooks/etc, but that's actively spiting the player. Many DMs will just simply not know what the martials need as magical items, or give them magical items that don't match their build, etc.

Casters require less DM handholding in response to a scenario. MOST casters I know are casters because the DM fucked their wet shitbag martial character over or they were tired of not having a smorgasboard of tools to deal with problems inside and out of combat.

There's only so much you can do in mid to high level player with "I RUN UP AND HIT HIM WITH MY PIECE OF METAL" which eventually becomes "I RUN UP AND HIT HIM WITH MY +1 PIECE OF METAL". There's no dynamic solutions without magic.

>>52393587
Advantage is roughly a +4.5 bonus or something. Do with that what you will.

>>52393622
Hexblade

>>52393632
This is assuming you have a sufficient STR to grapple effectively in the first place you you DOUBLE NIGGER

>captcha- career benis
fug :DD

>>52393637
Because it's not poorly balanced or thought out. It takes a lot of down time and resources to get Simulacrum up and running and if your DM isn't a fucking retarded, it's easy to deal with. It's also really easy to roll with and make it into a plot point. Anything the players can do, an evil enemy wizard can do as well.

I frankly love anything high octane like that and I only pity people who can't cope.

>>52393523
>Regardless if someone grinded up to level 20 and then used the spell or if the campaign started at that level and they took the spell is no different at all.

Perhaps you should think about what you're saying? It is massively different.

The vast majority of campaigns will not get anywhere close to Wish+Simulacrum.

Of those that do, few DMs are weak enough to allow something so retarded.

Of those that do, they must justify why the PC is the first to have thought of that and why any lich antagonists (for example) haven't flooded the multiverse with thousands of duplicates.

And finally, of these terrible DMs who allow the dumbest RAW tricks possible, the saving grace is that this will probably only be a way to trivialize the ass end of the campaign.

>And yes, banning a cool high level spell is still the same as banning a cool high level thing

Ignoring the fact that destroying game balance (completely, moreso than, say, nuclear druids) isn't "a cool thing," banning one high level thing is not banning all high level things. Simple logic.

>no idea how to deal with it

Ask the player if he thinks it should be allowed.
Ask the player how he'd feel if all antagonists have already done so.
Run a special one shot for him in which he sees how far he'll get with infinite lich simulacrums occupying all space.

>Why not ban everything you don't like?

Everything is subject to DM discretion, most of all incredibly retarded interpretations of already horrendous spells.

>>52393682
Already answered here >>52393670

>>52393654
As a general rule, rerolling is better in the middle of the line (20%-80% chance of success) but a flat bonus makes more sense at the edges (below 20% where evey bit counts and above 80% where a flat bonus means you might get close to 100% flat).

>>52393682
>vast majority
>few DMs are weak
>must justify
>terrible DMs
>destroying game balance

I'm glad my area has a lot of high level campaigns and DMs that simply do not give a shit and are willing to roll with the punches and run with ANY crazy shit the players come up with.

>Infinite Lich Simulacrums occupying all space

I already played a Spelljammer campaign like this and it was awesome.

>>52393650

Sure Hexblade but should i just get like +1 Charisma and go for high Str and Con? 1 handed or 2 ? Two-weapon?

>>52393703
Thank you for your wisdoms wisdom anon.

>>52393670
Anything can be neutered if it's "made into a plot point". You can have the world fall into a perpetual winter and that would be an interesting plot point but it doesn't mean wizards should just learn how to do it by reaching level 13.

>>52393732
Well basically this means that you probably want Advantage unless your DM tends to throw enemies that are basically impossible to grapple or enemies that are almost always grappled.

>>52393547
>What does determine whether an act is good or evil in the standard 5e setting?

1e: The gods -- presumably. I know of no one who actually likes this rule, but its a thing. 1e offers no indication of what happens when there are less than 9 gods in a setting (1 per alignment) or when there are 2+ gods per alignment.

2e: Some sort of vague planar semiconsciousness sorting algorithm (re: the Outer Planes), presumably gods are in charge of interpreting evil acts *with their own fellows*, the Dark Powers decide what is an evil act in Ravenloft. "Good has no absolute values," though.

3e: Objective alignment is introduced.

4e: "Chaotic Evil" is a force at the Heart of the Abyss planted in the Elemental Chaos by Tharizdun, and in Dark Sun, slavery isn't for good characters to use. That's about it.

5e: Back to subjectivity & relativism again. Vague planar sorting algorithm. You definitely seem to be able to booted from a LG afterlife destination for doing things your society doesn't approve of, for example.

>>52392034
>Probably the only exception is pixies which can make you on touch make a DC 10 charisma save or else they find out your alignment.
I don't think that's in 5E, is it?

>>52393748
How else is the world going to fall into a perpetual winter then?

>>52392068
No one mention the Monster Hunter for fighter? That stuff is pretty cool.

>>52393728
Honestly Hexblade's far better. It gives Medium armour, all weapons from level one and lets you still be a good caster. Also reflavoring Hexblade as a martial Warlock of anyone else should fly if flavor's something you're worried about. There's a reason people say Hexblade "Fixed" the Bladelock.

If you really don't want to be Hexblade then the only other good one IMO is Fey with the Moon Bow. It lets you be a ranged Bladelock so you don't need to worry about how fragile you are.

File: 1433217374023.jpg (152KB, 583x777px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 583x777px

>Variant Rule: Psychic Tells
>Many psionic abilities are subtle, and may not have an apparent effect when manifested. In your world, this may not be the case; while a Mystic does not need to employ specific gestures or chants as a wizard or cleric does, their efforts often leave some detectable trace.
>With this variant rule, any psionic ability that does not specify that the target is unaware of the attempt if they are unaffected manifests some sign of your magical meddling. This may be a method or byproduct of the mental focus required to use such powers, such as a furrowed brow, clenched fist, outstretched arm, or rhythmic tapping. It could also be a visible manifestation such as a brief flash of light, a momentary glow, or a spark in the eyes of you or your target. It could even be a mark on another sense such as a sudden and brief scent of burning ozone, a wave of pressure or heat, or even a wary mind instinctively noticing the power yours is exerting. In any case, your DM may rule that creatures may detect your presence when using certain powers or identify you as the source of certain effects. They may also rule that you can make a deception, stealth, slight of hand, or other appropriate check to avoid the suspicion of your enemies.

Is this necessary and/or fair?

>>52393694

Wrong. That guy has no idea what is being discussed.

>>52393670
How does a player cope at level 1 with all space and time occupied by evil lich simulacrums rolling initiative the moment they see you, and how does a DM cope with hundreds of thousands of initiative rolls and spells going off continuously?

>down time and resources

Here's your homework for the day: Look up the casting time and material component cost of Wish.

>>52393840
>level 1

You need to get over your obsession that games start at level 1.

Not everyone wants to play Rusty Dagger Shankton. Most of the games I've been in start at 5 at the lowest on average, most usually 7.

>>52393840
I said Simulacrum, not Wish. Level 20 is certainly easier to make the combo go off.

>>52393622
Check out the recent Warlock UA. Gives loads of boosts to bladelock through Hexblade and the invocations.

Fey Bladelock gets a cool bow with smite, might be worth looking into, and the general buff invocations are a way of keeping pace.

Otherwise, multiclass. My personal taste is Rogue because Extra Attack works well with Sneak Attack, and using Darkness and Devil's Sight is hella useful for getting SAs in.

>>52393840
Why would evil lich simulacrums roll initiative when they see you? I assume the evil lich has more compelling plans than destroy all life. He probably wouldn't have filled spacetime with his essence if he did.

He's probably going to make a proper go at the Lady of Pain.

>>52393522
Everybody gets a single bulletpoint from a feat to a weapon it would normally apply to, to any weapons they have in their inventory.

They could maybe take a feat for a second bullet point worth of feat material or something, though.

They shouldn't be entire feats, because in the end they mosty work out as combat power upgrades rather than utility upgrades.

>>52393829
I mean I kinda figured it was just implied depending on character theme. You might have a Psychic who makes crazy arm movements and shoots fist beams or another who just twitches their eyelid a bit and causes their enemy to have a stroke

>tfw once had my DM give my GOOlock free permenant Subtle Spell (As long as they weren't grappled or anything) without me asking them to because it fit the theme of them well, taking my meme build to full viable
feels goodman

>>52393650
Advantage is ~+3.35

This thread encouraged me to roll up a Wizard.

Thanks guys.

>>52393602
>Either everything is okay or nothing is.

Objectively wrong, 5e is quite openly a game in which the DM can allow or disallow anything.

>then why is he leaving in Wish?

Wish's only broken application is in conjunction with Simulacrum, everything else is spell emulation and DM discretion.

>Why isn't he banning any of the other spells that can go infinite?

Because they don't exist. Presumably you mean Planar Binding pokemon hunting, which isn't infinite in the least.

>He just has a hateboner ONLY for Simulacrum?

The only spell that goes into the infinite.

>The crux of the argument is basically "I want to ban this because I can't handle it".

"Ten thousand lich new simulacra a day curb stomping everything in the universe" isn't something that can be handled mechanically and is really boring.

>>52393922
good choice
cause
druids
are
GHEY!

>>52393796
This isn't detect evil, this is some 'heart sense' thing.

So, oddly, the only way to detect evil is to be a pact of the chain warlock.

>>52393604
Congratulations retard, you just described two ways to "fix the fighter" by making him a ranger, who incidentally has plenty of out of combat stuff.

>>52393925
>isn't something that can be handled mechanically and is really boring

But it can.

With ten thousand new wizard simulacra a day.

And it can be awesome if you turn them into space fleets.

>>52393890

RAW sneak attack should only apply once per round.

>>52393946
Because every other class, as I've described, is something more than his weapon. A Fighter is nothing BUT his weapon, which is why they're often percieved to be boring, underfeatured, etc.

>>52393925
You could just cast Wish and Wish there was only one lich desu

There's a lot of mechanical options.

>>52393963
Once per turn not once per round.

>>52393507
Any more input on this?
Retarded or a good idea?

>>52393314
Bump on this, it got buried in the >muh op wizards
discussion

File: 6472c88a515e9d15ddd8d70c69e53c7d.jpg (74KB, 691x860px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 691x860px

What are some cool weird science things I can do with my Frankenstein style wizard? I was thinking about getting a flesh golem and using witchbolt to buff it, using animate object to create killer robots, and clone to create a laboratory of immortality. What are some other ways to really drive the mad scientist vibe home?

>>52393987
That isn't a mechanical option, that's DM fiat.

>>52393936
>This isn't detect evil, this is some 'heart sense' thing.
I can't even find that in the description. In fact the MM describes them as gauging visitors' temperaments from afar by playing tricks on them and seeing how they react, instead of magically intuiting it.

File: 1487896469890.png (299KB, 587x528px) Image search: [Google]

299KB, 587x528px

Hey guys, remember when that druid and I argued and I was being really funny and talking about using forcecage and stuff, and he was saying he could change into a great ape, but then it turns out he was wrong about the feature and he can't even become a great ape at all, and I won? Remember how cool that was?

I know that druid is still in the thread, and I want him to know, that I know, he's a faggot.

File: Space Lich War.jpg (123KB, 1024x540px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 1024x540px

>>52393925
>"Ten thousand lich new simulacra a day curb stomping everything in the universe" isn't something that can be handled mechanically and is really boring.


That's where you're wrong, kiddo.

>>52393643
>DM charity

We're not talking about DM charity.

>You can argue that a DM can go out of their way to bust the casters' balls with antimagic fields/stealing spellbooks/etc

AMFs etc? Nah. Nothing like that. Magic resistance, dispel magic and counterspells puts a HELL of a lot more damper on casters than "half damage from nonmagical bludgeoning/piercing" interferes with martials.

Now, I will agree that AMFs are the equivalent of "surprise, no magic gear!" campaigns.

>but that's actively spiting the player.

"Surprise, there are no magic weapons this campaign! there's still monsters immune to nonmagic weapons" is indeed actively spiting the player.

Now you're veering off into "martials are boring!" Which is... okay? Lots of people prefer someone who is bad ass round after round over someone who can *maybe* do something cool a couple times per day, IF they don't run into the copious amounts of magic resistant, counterspelling, or magic dispelling monsters around.

>>52393724
>I already played a Spelljammer campaign like this and it was awesome.

How did you win at level 1 vs 250168717601076 lich simulacrums, out of curiosity? Why didn't the other 10161061916068771656916 arrive to stomp your shit in? Why does anyone think this is a fun thing to have happen? Just pretending to be retarded?

>>52394027
>anon accidentally creates the Necron in Dungeons and Dragoning 40K 7th Edition with a Simulacrum uncertainty Lich paradox

>>52394038
>bad ass round after round

>I HIT THE GUY WITH MY SWORD
>I HIT THE GUY WITH MY SWORD WHILE SPINNING
>I HIT THE GUY WITH MY SWORD WHILE YELLING
>I DO A BACKFLIP AND HIT *TWO* GUYS WITH MY SWORD

So bad ass.

My Druid Song: http://vocaroo.com/i/s08JaT5DRJ0Q

>>52391883
>Mobile could be nice combined with Booming Blade

Think you got it right there. In general, Feats are funner (Martial Adept just opens you up for a lot of fun maneuvers, if only it gave more than 1 superiority die) but ASI are more efficient. There of course are exceptions.

Damn if only Elemental Adept was better.

Does charger feat is of any use?

>>52393622
Fighter 1 / Warlock X

Fighter gives you CON saves and Medium/Heavy Armor and Shields for the AC you need.

The only other alternative is Hexblade UA.

Other multiclassing options are really just supporting some other class with the level 1-5 Warlock perks.

>>52394057
We escaped into the phlogiston where the lich simulacrums could not enter because it was a one-way flowriver and he hadn't expanded in number enough yet to control the flow.

Even though there were a few thousand of them, because they were all copies of each other, they shared the same simulacrum, which was literally the crystal shell of his home material plane. And we obviously didn't "win" at level one - who ends a campaign at level one?

>>52393893
>Why would evil lich simulacrums roll initiative when they see you?

To destroy all possible threats and gather all possible resources and because the universe will run out of people before it runs out of lich simulacra.

> I assume the evil lich has more compelling plans than destroy all life.

He can do both -- effortlessly.

Ruthlessly enslave all life, by having a team of lich simulacrums monitor every person on the entire planet for the slightest sign of defiance, is another good option.

>>52393963
Yeah, but the point is that you want to maximise chances of it hitting. The extra attack gives you a whole extra chance to get that sneak attack - compared to 2 chances if you're dual wielding, or 1 if you're using the bonus action for something else, like hiding or casting Hex.

>>52394002
Bumping

>>52394057
The same way the PCs in Ravenloft aren't instantly gibbed by Strahd teleporting in and fireballing their level 1 asses, I imagine. More important things to work on than "that guy might become more powerful than me one day so I better kill everyone"

>>52393932
Stop trying to force your meme autismo wizard

>>52393962

No, it can't be handled mechanically. Its just freeform at that point.

>>52394123
Stop giving him (you)s.

>>52393987

DM handwaving is not a "mechanical option."

>>52394116
>bumping an active thread where people are clearly posting in it

>>52394105
You're really going as far now to claim someone else's bizarre spelljammer lich campaign was done "wrong" because the lich-army had motivations other than "kill everything". I applaud you, kind autist.

>>52394144

Fuck I'm feeding the troll you're right

>>52394002
>using witchbolt to buff it,
what do you mean?

i think you just need to have a lengthy conversation with your DM, brainstorming this shit. our advice will be impractical or vague at best.

>>52394136
Anything can be handled mechanically if you're not a little bitch.

>>52394156
>Simulacrum is mechanical, but Wish isn't, and DM banning simulacrum is mechanical but letting the player use Wish is a handwave

>tfw people want to ban Simulacrum and not Wish when Wish has always been the problem
>always

Y'all niggas don't know shit about Wizards.

>>52394027


Not even close.

Is a Hexblade better off getting the extra attack invocation or using BB/GFB? Assuming I'm not grabbing super sword of course.

>>52394059

Often a lot more fun than the alternative (wait 24 hours, cast a few spells that are resisted half or more of the time, wait another 24 hours).

File: the more you know.jpg (14KB, 600x150px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 600x150px

>>52394158
Sometimes when people say "bump" they mean to draw attention to a question/post that was ignored, not bump the thread.

>>52394104
See, a crystal sphere where someone has already "won" is perfectly valid. That's part and parcel of SJ, not every crystal sphere will still be one in which "stuff happens."

How would one build a fake mage PC? That is, someone who uses deception and trickery to make people think they can cast spells even though they don't have a magical bone in their body. Bonus points if I can fake being a divine caster

>>52394221
Sometimes when a post is ignored, it's because people don't give a fuck, not because they didn't see it.

>>52394252
And sometimes people want to make sure it wasn't people not seeing it

>>52394247
Rogue, max Persuasion and Sleight of Hand tricks.

File: 1476120376509.jpg (174KB, 1024x728px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 1024x728px

>>52391815
As both a player and as a DM, I love 5e thoroughly. Character creation is much more flexible and you don't end up penalizing yourself for making fun character concepts like in previous editions, magic item economy is moderately balanced thanks to attunement, spell economy is also moderately balanced thanks to concentration, and the system as a whole is very simplified so it is much easier to teach to new-comers as well as very easy to check on rulings. Granted, it is not a perfect system. Conjuration seemed to take a big hit with most summoning spells going away, necromancers can't deck out their undead legion like they could in prior editions, and best master ranger is sadly weak, but as a whole 5e is my favorite edition.

>>52394252
That doesn't change the fact you're ignorant and needed to be educated. I'm looking out for you anon.

>>52394264
Everyone saw it, faggot. The thread isn't moving at warp speeds nor are there that many people in it.

Nobody cared. You are not entitled to replies. Enjoy your (You).

>>52394285
>get called out for bumping an active thread because your post didn't get enough (You)s
>calling anyone else ignorant

Please fuck off back to /pfg/.

>>52394286
Someone did reply to it after his bump so apparently you're just factually wrong.
Way to go.

>>52394120
>The same way the PCs in Ravenloft aren't instantly gibbed by Strahd teleporting in and fireballing their level 1 asses, I imagine

Strahd is not at all comparable. Strahd is an ordinary level 9 mage with some tough features added on. He can still strive, struggle, or have interesting things happen in Barovia. Simulacrum cheese means you win, or at least all combat and magic related tasks are irrelevant, and the heart of the game (challenges) are torn out.

>More important things to do

There aren't "things to do" anymore. You won. No more challenges (mechanically) anymore. You can enslave every person in every corner of the planet.

>>52394208
BB/GFB is always better. Scales way better than extra attack usually does unless you have a magical sword that applies extra on hit effects.

>>52394172
Electric damage heals flesh golems, so it'd be a ?d12 hp boost on the first round with an additional 1d12 regeneration ever latter round

>>52394301
They say the hardest students to teach are the ones who think they already know when they're in fact wrong.

>>52394158

No, I'm saying that if there *are* any antagonists that have level 9 wizard spells, they may have already obliterated the PCs with the weight of 100k simulacra. There are no concerns of "sorry, got shit to do" -- they won.

File: unarmed strike.jpg (9KB, 350x190px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 350x190px

>>52394059
Following this logic grapplers are the most "cool" characters since you can always find some kind of environmental hazard to slam someones face off.

>I SLAM THE GUY ON THE SPIKE TRAP
>I THROW THE GUY INTO THE PIT
>I PUSH HIS FACE INTO THE FORGE
>I HIT THE GUY WITH HIS FRIEND (DAMAGING BOTH)
Really all you need to do some severe damage to any Medium creature is a high enough strength score and a stone floor, anything else is just icing on the cake.

I just wish there was actual rules for different grappling improvised attacks, since otherwise you'd deal exactly the same damage punching someone in the gut as you would giving someone the American History X treatment- except the one doing it would be an 8 foot tall Goliath.

Is a new UA coming out today, or did anyone tweet a delay?

>>52394308
>There aren't "things to do" anymore. You won.

This is how I can tell you're not cut out to be a caster. The setting for 5E is a fucking MULTIVERSE. One planet is beyond smalltime. It wouldn't even be noticed by most of the bigshots. LoP would still stomp you out like a wet cracker.

There are PLANES out there to be conquered. Swiggity swooty, I'd be going for Tiamat's booty.

>>52394181
>Anything can be handled mechanically if you're not a little bitch.

Okay, go ahead and take 115186171 turns. Its just boring.

>Simulacrum is mechanical, but Wish isn't

Using Wish to duplicate a spell is mechanical.

Asking the DM nicely to allow your Wish to kill a hundred quadrillion beings with Legendary Resistance is not.

>>52394352
you're stupid

Soooo, while looking to answer questions I noticed the Bladepact weapon isn't actually magical, it just overcomes magical resistance.

Nor do the "It's now a +1 weapon" invocations make it magical.

Does that mean this all stacks with Elemental weapon which Hexblade's can cast? So we can have a Longsword in two hands doing 1d10+16+3d4 with two attacks per round and an Attack modifier of +17 or am I missing something here?

Of course this is a very high level example but still at level 5 you can do 1d10+6+1d4 with two attacks per round and Attack Modifier of +9 for two hours per short rest. Seems pretty decent especially if you pick up Dueling Fighting Style.

>>52394324
D&D has metric fucktons of antagonists that have done exactly this. This isn't new. Vecna has rubbed his dick all over Sigil, Ravenloft, become a minor god, then became a bigger god.

>>52394335
Magical luchadores, anon.

>>52394197
Other way around. The only problematic element of Wish is, in this case, its ability to emulate a spell that already has shit up the game for decades.

>>52394369
Hot rebuttal. He's not wrong. The game is marketed as a multiverse for a reason. Sometimes people like to even go to those other settings!

>>52394377
As far as I know, ANY +1 to a weapon automatically makes it magical.

File: ree.gif (1MB, 680x680px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 680x680px

>Play a martial
>DM gives us more money than I know what to do with
>Play a Wizard
>Don't get enough money to afford higher end components and ink for copying spells

>>52394383
No, simulacrum has components. Wish is what removes those. Wish is the enabler.

>>52394402
Except, it doesn't. There's no rule saying anything is magical here except the Elemental Weapon spell. That and I just realised this gets broken as shit with PAM quarterstaffing, what a surprise.

>>52394352

>One planet is beyond smalltime

If it it takes massive effort for gods to subjugate, its not "smalltime."

>LoP would still stomp you out like a wet cracker.

I'm aware Sigil is a shithole.

>There are PLANES out there to be conquered.

By saying to the DM "Yeah, I throw simulacrum liches at it." Poof. Done.

>I'd be going for Tiamat's booty.

Done. There aren't challenges anymore, mechanically speaking, just simple 0/1 situations.

Can you morons take it into another thread? Because I don't know how everybody else is feeling, but I'm getting real tired of your shit.

>>52394381
>D&D has metric fucktons of antagonists that have done exactly this.

How is "zero" a "metric fuckton?"

>Vecna has rubbed his dick all over Sigil, Ravenloft, become a minor god, then became a bigger god.

Yet nothing even slightly on the level of infinite simulacra, and if he could do it, then he would have remade the universe in his own image already rather than being foiled.

Apparently, the reason he didn't do it is because Vecna is too dumb.

>>52394470
In response to who?

>>52394439
>anti-magic planes aren't a challenge
>time-travelling isn't a challenge
>etc

You're just a shitty DM that can't think outside the space-lich box.

>>52394480
The guy that sucks ass at DMing high level games and the guy that thinks everyone wants to play Spelljammer.

>>52394413
>No, simulacrum has components.

Trivial components. Simulacrum is still fun killing, campaign destroying cancer with the components.

>Wish is what removes those. Wish is the enabler.

Yet remove Simulacrum and all the problems go away. Remove Wish and Simulacrum still shits up your campaigns, as well as obliterating your PCs if your villains have it.

File: Capture.png (752B, 76x19px) Image search: [Google]

752B, 76x19px

>>52394470
push this button if it bothers you that much.

t. not involved in this autismfest

>>52394208
GFB/BB if you're straight Hexblade. If you're multiclassing, it could be anything.

Because of my Bladelock multiclass build and weapons, Extra Attack gives me an average damage of 42 compared to 26 with Booming Blade AND assuming the enemy moves.

>>52394507
Just let it happen it will go away eventually

>>52394494

>time travel in a game without rules for time travel

You don't seem to understand what constitutes a "mechanical challenge" apparently.

>>52394507
If you wanted us to keep going that badly, just say so.

>>52394309
Uh, no.

The extra effects of the spells are nice, but situational. You can't always rely on the target having to move or having a secondary target within 5 feet.

Damage-wise, extra attacks are almost always better just from the fact you get to add your modifier to it.

Not to mention that two chances to hit rather than one per round means you'll be doing a whole lot better against higher AC enemies.

>>52394571
Green-flame blade does not require a second target to cast it.

>>52394533
Fighting warforged.

>>52394208
>>52394517
I think if Elemental Weapon does work with all the features then it's going to be more powerful then BB/GFB once extra attack comes on.

Average level 5 damage of BB: 15 (If it triggers 24)

Average with 2 attacks and an Elemental Weapon: 26.

Both of these include the +1 Invocation and a +4 Charisma Modifier. Elemental Weapon also gets +1 Attack and works better with the Hexblade Curse.

>>52391867

Illusion Wizard with high charisma


Obviously take the Prestidigitation and the Minor Illusion cantrip

>>52394586
I know, but I mean that having a secondary target is one of the few times when a GFB attack is a better idea than a normal attack action with extra attack