/5eg/ Fifth Edition General:

>>52666788
>What's your usual dump stat

INT

>>52666809
I mean in game, not IRL :^)

kill me

>>52666788
str... been playing rogues and ranger lately so I need those investagation rolls

>>52666788
>>52666809

>What's your usual dump stat?

The problem is that only the wizard has good INT and yet all role play as genius level masterminds.

>>52666788
>What's your usual dump stat?
>I'M THE MYSTIC, MASTER OF THE MIND AND MATTER!
>Dude, get away from the flail snail!
>BUT ITS CUTE, AND ISN'T ATTACKING.
>Yet. Its going to eat the corpses first.
WIS.

guys which module in Yawning Portal will be suitable for a Middle earth game

I need help with a wizard im trying to build. My DM is limiting me to 2 schools of magic and i would be the 2nd full caster with the bard as the other. I would be the bulk of spell damage to my group and was thinking of Evocation being my second school with Transmutation or Conjuration being the primary, unless im missing so odd combination of schools that would be stronger.

>>52667094
>My DM is limiting me to 2 schools of magic
What are you, an arcane trickster, an eldritch knight?

>>52666788
Depends on the character but never Wisdom. I've dumped everything else at least once but always at least 12 Wisdom.

>>52667126
I think his DM is trying to "fix" what isn't the most powerful class in the game because he's seen people who have never played how the Wizard's the best.

>>52667094
It'll make you near on worthless because a Wizards main draw is being versatile so I'd recommend playing anything else.

>>52667094
Ah, an AD&D DM. Stuck in the old ways when they would specialize in two schools, dump two others and be mediocre at everything else.

Don't play a wizard then. Do a Light Cleric, those guys are fun

>>52667185
Ill just go sorcerer and meta magic my way.
>>52667267
I did play a light cleric already that was my last groups only source of offensive magic. It was like radiant wizard lite.

Question: What's wrong with 5e?

Like, nothing seems wrong on the face of it, but adoption is so low. I don't see any obvious problems, and nobody points them out in big edition wars, but people just keep on playing other games that are demonstrably shit, like Pathfinder.

Are there any good ways of making huge invasion encounters not a total slog to run?

>>52666788
obviously depends on the character, for my paladin it was INT, for my bard it was STR, now for my wizard i decided to roll for stats in order so DEX and CON are my dump stats.

>>52667507
I was under the impression that 5E is the second most played edition after PF?

I mean people play the system they're used to because they've sunk a lot of time into it. It's the same reason people play League of Legends even though it's the worst MOBA by a country mile.

>>52667507

Are you basing this off your experiences in the town where you live, your local gaming store, or the internet?

Because if you're basing your idea of the adoption level of 5e on contrarian internet autismos, you may have a skewed viewpoint. People who play in person with their friends overwhelmingly play 5e where I live.

>>52667507
I think your assumptions are wrong, anon. 5e is probably THE most played tabletop RPG game right now. The only people who keep playing other editions or Pathfinder are those either stuck in their ways, or with other people in their playgroup who are stuck in their ways and unwilling to try it, mostly under the excuse of "5e lacks options" or "It's too simple", etc.

>>52667507
There isn't a constant bevy of splatbooks to keep it fresh in people's minds and create discussion.

Also we use generals now, so ideas and games don't really spread much.

Can I roll Persuade ( Strength) to seduce people with my muscle?

>>52667518
start by checking the mass combat rules, play it either super epically, with PCs making tons of actions and exploding fuckers by the second, or take it slow over several sessions, but balancing between the strategy and the intrigue, don't let your group settle on a strat, have the battlefield change or something like that.

>>52667507

A lot of the complaints I have personally about 5e is that it falls into 'Not bad but nothing particularly interesting' either. It didn't really take any risks or do much to define itself other than 'I'm D&D'.

It went backwards on many of the really good things in 4e (Healing Surges are the opposite of 4e ones, saves rather than static defences to have attacks against, back to spells per day) so it doesn't even build on it's predecessor other than to run away from it as quickly as possible.

>>52667592
only if they are fags and/or girls.

>>52667592
I'll give you advantage if you write a full paragraph about how gloriously you tear off your clothing just so you can flex.

Anyone who's not into men will instead be intimidated if they fail their save
Your clothing and/or armor will be unusable until repaired

>>52667614
Who else would you be seducing with muscles?

>>52667601
>nothing particularly interesting
This to be honest.

We need a bevy of setting books with awesome new subraces and class specializations. Dark Sun helped fill this niche for 4e, but it was already on top of primal and psionic and dark stuff which was more or less new, at least in how it was characterized.

>>52667570
>The only people who keep playing other editions or Pathfinder [...]
Or people with no 5e in their language. Pathfinder and even 4e are huge in Spain.

File: Roll20 Industry Report 2016.png (312KB, 475x643px) Image search: [Google]

312KB, 475x643px

>>52667566
Even on the internet people overwhelmingly play 5e.

>>52666809
It used to be CHA but seeing the new UA on downtime and finding magic items relying on Persuation checks I'm starting to think definitely INT

Becoming more interested in making a Bard that exists solely to collect magic items with the most pumped out Persuasion check you can get. A regular Diplomancer

>>52667696
That is absolutely true, just after I pressed "Post" I realized I forgot to say that. I myself live in Brasil, where people are still playing mostly 3.5 and 4e.

>>52667507

The game is balanced around 6-8 encounters per day with a short rest in between. Realistically, campaigns just don't play that way, and power ends up skewed towards classes that have a large resource pool they are supposed to slowly consume vs classes with small resource pools they are meant to replenish with short rests.

Questionable allowances were made to keep things in the vein of pre 4e flavor, so for example we have Sorcerers that just feel like they were meant to use a Spell Points system.

They were afraid of making Dual Wielding good, and ended up making it a straight up mechanically inferior call compared to two-handing 95% of the time.

Hand Crossbows are, because of a Feat interaction, far ahead the best ranged weapons in the game. Said Feat interaction was also meant to make it viable to dual wield melee and ranged, but it doesn't.

They decided to include stat rolling as the basic stat generation mechanic, while barely supporting it - the game is balanced around point buy and the 'default' array, and stat rolling can easily results in gimped characters without a large dose of house rules.

PHB Ranger is bad. Monk is unclear about what it's supposed to be to a player not already familiar with the system. I wont get into the bad archetypes.

There are no effective aggro mechanics, therefore characters who want to be 'tanks' or area control frontliners have to rely on DM fiat or their damage output in order to be threats the enemies would feel compelled to deal with. This makes singleclassed Barbarians trash compared to Fighters and Paladins.

>>52667719
>half
>overwhelmingly
Also those numbers are "play it at all" not necessarily "play it by first choice" as should be obvious by the fact that the first three otherwise make up 117% of players.

>>52666788
Dexterity or Constitution, I usually play casters but Strength is skewed because I cannot physically stop myself from giving every other character the Smithing proficiency, help.

>>52667798
With this many variables, 50% of the games being D&D 5E is still considered 'overwhelmingly popular' by a statistics standpoint, but I guess that's just semantics by this point.

is mystic good

>>52667863
It's not even number one if you consider pathfinder and 3.5 to be fundamentally the same thing. And once upon a time, D&D's latest edition would dominate to the point that nothing else came close.

>>52667897
It's not number one in terms of players, no, but it is number one in terms of games and is only a few percent behind on overall players, I still say it's doing pretty good for itself, but you have a point.

>>52667787
>there's no way to force the NPCs to act like mobs in an MMO instead of like people with thoughts of their own. It should not occur to any NPCs, even those of reasonable intelligence, to kill the wizard or cleric first. Even zombies and other mindless enemies should not attack the first PC within reach, but instead they should go for the "tank" even if he's a rank or two behind because he's "mocking" them and appealing to their nonexistent emotions.

I don't see a problem.

>>52667719
>>52667798
>>52667863
>>52667897

Remember that roll20 campaigns almost never get deleted, even if no one's playing them. So that table is not showing the number of active campaigns at any particular moment, but the total campaigns that have ever been created, including those from before 5e came out.

>>52667787
If these are the worst problems facing 5E then it's a pretty good system imho.

In order:

Sorcerers are fine.

House Rule that you can add your damage modifier to offhand attacks without a trait/feature.

Don't allow feats.

Don't roll for stats.

Use the UA Ranger.

Aggro mechanics are garbage.

File: Hmmm.jpg (243KB, 1200x867px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 1200x867px

>step through a portal into the Feywild
>suddenly this little Eladrin rides up and draws her sword
>she says "What the h*ck are you supposed to be?!"
What do?

What's the deal with Ironmaster? It's got a huge population and is really close to a lot of major Sword Coast cities and yet there's almost no information on it. My players want to visit it in SKT, but I've got almost nothing to work with other than "they don't like non-dwarves."

>>52668122
it's just too far north, and the ten towns are more interesting

I have a rogue (1/2 elf) with these stat ( in order)
6
18
14
8
14
16

in that order... what kinda to subclass should i be

Since we are playing SKT, I mixed between
AT or thief since they seem the most fun with RP, while Assassin and Swash seem purely combat

( not sure if i need a high int for AT)

>>52668092
>h*ck
BLUE BOARD

>>52668200
liar you made up those stats

>>52667982
>>52668081

I'm not arguing if favor of aggro mechanics.

What I'm saying is that 'tank' isn't a role in this system.

And therefore Barbarians have no role. They are shittier Fighters without combat utility.

>Don't allow feats.

This is an awful call because it severely hurts martial effectiveness. Don't diminish their ability to do their one job, or worse, take away the toys they can play with while doing it.

>>52668200
Maybe a scout?

>>52668200
what I rolled
6, 8, 17, 14, 14, 13.

>>52668190
My players are accompanying Augrek on their way to there though. They've been very insistent on dragging along NPCs for every quest they're involved in. So presumably I won't be able to do the whole "kick the players out since they're not dwarves" thing the book suggests.

SKT has references to a spelljammer ship, and OotA has references to the Great Modron March, would this mean Spelljammer and Planescape releases in the future?

File: 1473889402841.png (2MB, 1083x1156px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1083x1156px

Can someone propose a good build for a melee warlock?

>>52668246
I haven't ran SKT but the lore on that city is clear. You can't come in if you aren't a dwarf. But you're the DM so you can say something like "non-dwarves are tolerated but never welcomed, and all non-dwarves who enter the city can stay no longer than a tenday and must pay a sizeable tax"

>>52668253
I think they've been referencing them just for fun. I don't want to get my hopes up for planescape content.

On page 127 of SKT, if you turn the page upside down, the runes spell "Planescape 5e Setting Is Coming Out Winter 2017 -Chris Perkins"

>>52667787
>The game is balanced around 6-8 encounters per day with a short rest in between.
This is the single greatest problem I've encountered with the system, alternative rest mechanics can work for most campaigns but not every one, and the ones left in gaps force DMs to either jump through hoops (base camp towns) or force them to adjust balance on the go for every single day of encounters.

Sorcerer should use spell points but if it doesn't let him keep the progression with other full casters it'd make him SHIT at multiclassing or a complete mess with the warlock, which already is his strongest multiclass.

Crossbow expert is fine, the rest of the weapons just need better things, it's not ok to have a bunch of martial weapons that are absolutely outclassed by even simple weapons, and simple weapons that are worse than anything at all. Every weapon deserves at least some degree of uniqueness and flexibility, part why martials feel so lackluster in general.

>They decided to include stat rolling as the basic stat generation mechanic
Actually, rolling for stats is not allowed in adventurer's league or any kind of sanction play, so even if the PHB seems to suggest the use of rolling for stats, it's not the supported generation mechanic.

UA ranger still needs to be tweaked so it isn't absolutely broken with multiclassing. Monk is fin to some extend, it does what it does just don't expect anything it's not built to do, non-magical stunning is still pretty fucking strong.

Aggro mechanics are complete shit, this isn't an MMO and it doesn't need to imitate one. There could be more dynamic options and strategical advantages for martial fighting but tanks in general are a stupid idea and can be overcome with smart positioning and map awareness.

>>52668302
I-Is this true?

File: 1490941107686.jpg (19KB, 484x429px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 484x429px

>>52668323

>>52668288
I think they've been saying having a nod to the references mean they might actually be doing something with that reference in a future release. So here's hoping.

>>52668302
Kek.

>>52668223
>I'm not saying there should be aggro mechanics, I'm saying there should be a role based entirely around manipulating aggro mechanics

>>52668331
Crazier things have happened.

Marvel just fired a guy for slipping insanely anti-semitic remarks into the background of an X-Men comic

>>52668092
Well, what the h*ck am I?

Has anyone come up with or seen decent Naval rules for 5e? I don't want to reinvent the wheel if I don't have to.

>>52668262
hexblade works. its not great, but you do outdamage eldritch blast with cursebringer and GWM.

no other patron really works for melee without multiclassing for spell slots to fuel your super smite

>>52668323
100 percent true. I just checked.

>>52668344

4e managed it without actually having aggro.

>>52668370
Yeah. There's a couple of BM maneuvers that kinda do the whole 'marking' thing again. They would certainly help make barbs tankier.

>>52668370
What, speaking? Or the "not just rage" abilities

>>52668200
You can be an AT with low Int if you limit yourself to spells that don't benefit from Int, like Sleep and Shield, and you just that nobody tries to see through your illusions. In my experience, though, people who play one-third casters frequently forget that they even have spells. Maybe be a thief or swashbuckler

>>52668262
Begin as a fighter or a non-casting ranger, grab some manouvers, then be a goo bladelock.
Get a free magic weapon, a 1-handed weapon with reach that drops people to 0 speed, and black tentacles for battlefield control.
Fuck their shit up with smites, while never having to be inside their melee range, unless they've got reach too.

What's a good roadmap for a Rogue/Warlock multiclass?

I want to play a "gambler made a deal with the devil" sort of character. Would prefer to lean more heavily on melee than spells.

BRING BACK MULTICLASS FEATS
BAN TRADITIONAL MULTICLASSING
BRING BACK MARKING ENEMIES VIA FEAT
NO DWARVES IN IRONMASTER

>>52668426
Nah

I played a character who was a twin who absorbed his brother in the womb, and his brother was a reincarnated wizard, so that's why he has some innate spellcasting ability. His brothers face was on his belly like in Total Recall and could talk at times and offer Arcana information

In very broad strokes, could you explain me the biggest differences between 5e and 3e? I don't want to read the GM and player books just to find out

>>52668426
>BRING BACK MARKING ENEMIES VIA FEAT
fuck off. "I mark that guy." over and over was/is fucking annoying. Why not just do cumulative damage potential per consecutive attack with a cap for fucks sake.

>>52668454
5e has much simpler mechanics, lower power, more balanced by a mile, has fast character creation, fast combat, absurd multiclassing is discouraged (no more abjurer 3/abjuration specialist 10/initiate of the seven veils 7) and Mask is now chaotic neutral??

>>52668370
But still in a way that didn't make a ton of sense and felt like an MMO. It was designed to play like a system with aggro without having to count each player's individual level of threat toward every monster. It makes monsters make a beeline for the worst possible target by punishing them if they do anything smarter than that.

>>52668421
i wanted to make this one of my character's concept but he was more of a dex fighter than a str one, the claw of acamar does sound fucking metal so i'm torn apart.

can the normal warlock pick up booming blade?

>>52668470
I don't use it but people always ask for it. Calm down don't tell me to fuck off, it's just a discussion you mother fucking dick.

>>52668223
>Barbarians have no role
>Can eat damage and shit it out aswell

Barbarians"tank" by not dieing and killing everything around them

>>52668447
Um, that's not how wizards or reincarnation work in D&D.

Barbarians tank by only existing in your mind because no one one earth plays Barbs. Everyone goes "oh thats cool" then turns the page to Bard and is like "nm this is better" then turns the page to druids and laughs then turns the page to wizard eventually and chooses that

>>52668515
you've found a crucial flaw in my madeup character scenario

>>52668426
>>52668470
Aren't they already trying to bring back marking via classes? See the UA classes.

>>52668454
5e is much less fiddly and has less complexity, at least when it comes to character building and making choices. Most classes have special abilities that affect combat that have some sort of a resource pool.

In general, simpler and more streamlined.

>>52668420
it really the invisible mage hand that attract me

File: 1489062274841.gif (4MB, 200x313px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 200x313px

>>52668544
>Aren't they already trying to bring back marking via classes? See the UA classes.
maybe

How to run a better game:

>no vhuman allowed
>no wizards allowed

that's it

>>52668344
What I'm saying, numbnuts, is that Barbarian is a mechanically boring class whose only gimmick is being tough - but being tough doesn't help the party in any way.

They're like shittier Champions. And to crown it they have the worst archetype in the game.

>>52668583

>the worst archetype in the game

Four Elements?
Non-revised Beastmaster?

>>52668598
correct
and land druid

>>52668492
With the feat, or by being an high elf, sure.
There's not much synergy with The Claw, tho, why not greenflame blade instead? You'll deal more damage just attacking, since you can't quicken or twin it, anyway.

>>52668583
Not any of them, if you don't like playing barbarians that's fine, doesn't mean that others don't, you fucking autistic piece of shit.

>>52668223
Barbarians are fine. Rage is a fun mechanic.

>>52668583
Not dying is always useful. So is having perma-advantage on every attack.

>>52668578
It won't come up a lot. Most of the time you can accomplish the same thing with a Sleight of Hand check, and few are the situations where you want to rob an NPC but not kill them.

Could Thay create a flying Enclave out of the Thaymount?

>>52667507
I'm playing in a game that's running PF right now. Originally it was 3.5. Then it was 2e. Now PF. Our game's timeline and system could already compete with Rincewind, so I don't tell the GM to switch, though it would be a lot easier for him to run 4e or 5e.

I think he might switch on his own this month though.

>>52666788
Usually dexterity or strength, depending of what type of character I am playing. Beyond that, I also dump either intelligence or charisma, again depending on the type of character I am making. Right now though I'm playing a Paladin so my lowest stats are dex and int.

>>52668583
Bear totem bearbarian is the worst archetype in the game?
Anon, did you get your coffee this morning?

>>52668489
>>52668553
The stat caps, skill proficiencies and backgrounds sound a bit limiting, but I don't know how much it affects the game in practice

What's there to say about them? Are the characters less customizable with skill ranks gone? Are these backgrounds mandatory or just a flavor siderule?

>>52668676
Why the fuck are y'all still playing PF? No one in their right mind does so.

>>52668411

Having abilities to allow people to defend allies.

>>52667592
You can roll Strength (persuade), but you have to move furniture for them and me and you won't get laid.

>>52668360
Desperation bump

>>52668490

Being hit with divine retribution if you attack a paladin's allies/wards didn't make sense?

>>52668701
He means the one we don't talk about.

>>52668672
See Mystra's ban On magic.

>>52668729
There's a good archetype for Barbarian that isn't Totem Warrior?

Did they release more?

::^^))

>>52668702
To the background part they are there as a guide if you have no clue what type of character to make. You can sit down and literally roll for a character but it isn't required I'm my experience. Mostly you pick one that fits what you had in mind for the proficiency in skills.

>>52668702
Would you like playing characters that work right out of the box?
Would you like having your characters actually have options that actually mean something and aren't functionally retarded or deceptive?

Would you like character creation that basically takes no time at all?
Because that's what's going to happen.

>>52668710
I want just once for my DM to let me Gaston it up

>>52668725
No, not at all. Remember how there's even a kine explaining how even the most mindless monsters somehow know exactly what marks are and the special bonus feature of each class' mark? That's dumb as shit. It's even dunber when you consider how similar that "divine retribution" is to every other defender's version of marking.

I hate marks and aggro, but what I'm okay with is stickiness, like Tunnel Fighting. Specializing in not letting guys move through you makes immediate sense, it's thematic, and it lets you protect your friends in the back without making the monsters act luke murlocs.

>>52666809
I give my players an extra language for every +1 modifier on INT to balance how weak it is. This actually makes an interesting RP element when the low CHA Wizard has to do negotiations with groups no one else can talk to

>>52668831

>It's even dunber when you consider how similar that "divine retribution" is to every other defender's version of marking.

Actually, none of the other defenders work like that.

Fighters get to stop people from moving past them.
Swordmages get to either teleport next to the guy who attacked an ally or reduce the damage he deals significantly.
Wardens are walking Difficult Terrain auras.

None of them work via 'You hit my ally, take immediate damage no matter where you are'. The closest is Assault Swordmages, who need to teleport next to you and hit you.

>>52668470
>Why not just do cumulative damage potential per consecutive attack with a cap for fucks sake.
What? No seriously, are you trying to communicate something here? Are you having a stroke?

>>52668936
They're all ways to hurt NPCs who don't act like stupid MMO characters, each with slightly different restrictions attached, and they all come tacked onto an abstract status effect that makes it harder to attack anyone but the "correct" target. It's all so forced, it's kind of pathetic.

>>52668978

Then how would you have a character, mechanically, protect others? As that 'Stickiness' comment is 100% how the Fighter and Warden worked. They were sticky.

>>52668978

As opposed to 3e having a class that literally had 'If you fail the save you must attack me' as an ability?

>>52668735
Thats expired.

>>52669036
Fighters and wardens doled out marks the same as the others, just with slightly different Bonus Mark Punishments attached. Every class in 4e was much too similar to every other class that did the same role.

If I really wanted to design a class built around protecting others, it's probably just do so directly, like a cleric that cast protective spells on people or a phalanx fighter with a shield that the guy to his right could hide behind a little. You know, things that could be described in-story and not just mechanically. Marking fails that test spectacularly because it's a pure game mechanic that doesn't represent anything outside of the game.

>>52669052
The 3.5 Knight was stupid as well. It came out late in 3.5's life cycle, and it was one of the classes that was clearly made to test new concepts that they were considering for 4e. (like Weeaboo Fightan Magic was for encounter powers and warlocks and reserve feats were for at-will spells.)

>>52669113

>like a cleric that cast protective spells on people or a phalanx fighter with a shield that the guy to his right could hide behind a little.

So...just buffs? No actual ability to actively protect?

Combat Superiority also stopped non-marked people fine.

>>52669135

>and it was one of the classes that was clearly made to test new concepts that they were considering for 4e

Evidently they ignored it as people needed to wait until 5e to get another 'Save or attack me' ability.

>warlocks and reserve feats were for at-will spells.)

...warlocks for At-Will Spells? Warlocks were VERY early in 3.5. Complete Arcane.

>>52669142
By your extremely narrow personal definition of "protect," no, I guess not.

>>52669173

Buffing is just one method of protection and one rarely actually tied to the 'protective' sorts of characters like fighters. Punishment and reducing mobility are also ways of doing it.

>Go to replace an alternator
>Come back and some autist is still arguing for agro mechanics

If you're that upset about it port them in from previous editions or go play those.

>>52669113

>You know, things that could be described in-story and not just mechanically. Marking fails that test spectacularly because it's a pure game mechanic that doesn't represent anything outside of the game.

Each of the individual marks had fluff attached to it. The Fighter's was challenging a foe (And punishing him for trying to run away), the Paladins was putting the threat of divine retribution on a guy and the swordmage's was a major part of it's fluff. The Aegis and it's sigils were parts of swordmage fluff that got mentioned all the time.

It's why none of them were just 'Mark'. They were 'Mark + something else' to get the fluffy effect.

Feat: Ambidextrous
Bonus action offhand attacks benefit from extra attack.

As it stands, ranged has a two feat tax (sharpshooter and crossbow expert), two handed has two (GWM and polearm master), so why not buff dual wielding by giving it this, while also tying it to the same level of feat requirement?

Anyone have any experience with 3rd party books? Monster books for example? How're Fifth Edition Foes or Tome of Beasts or other bestiaries? Can I use them without carefully checking out each entry beforehand for things that would shit everything up?

>>52669241

I think people get annoyed about them being called Aggro when they don't actually work like MMO aggro. MMO aggro is all about 'You have no choice but to attack me' (Like the 3.5 Knight) which is why it does fuck all in PvP rather than limiting choices/putting people between a rock and a hard place.

>>52668092

"I AM GEOFFROI DE CHARNOI, GREATEST KNIGHT IN THE WORLD."

"...I AM ALSO VERY LOST."

"CAN I BUY A MAP?"

File: 1481781347398.png (290KB, 540x304px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 540x304px

Please post pictures with the PHB in them.

>Running Curse of Strahd
>Doing Death House
>Warn players of massive deadliness of the campaign
>Think this means they will be as thoughtful as possible
>They show up as 4 different paladins


Welp, I had this coming

>>52669289
This gives Dual Wielding insane damage potential on Fighters.

>>52668707
>implying I'm in my right mind.
Also, I have lost track of the number of times we've changed editions and had to rebuild characters. The game has been running since 2001. I joined in 2004.

>>52669352
Seems like it's time to PURGE THE UNCLEAN

>>52668978
It's not abstract at all, and I believe they only knew the effects of abilities used on them, not that, for example, the fighter can attack a Marked enemy that attacks someone else, since that is the fighter's ability.

But hey, don't let not knowing the rules prevent you from bagging on 4E.

>>52669438

Yeah. They'd know about a paladin's stuff as it's something actually on them.

The fighter just does what the fighter does if they do stuff near him.

They'd know about the swordmage's too...but well, you can SEE the swordmage's. He shoved a big glowing fuck you rune on you with his magic.

>>52668616
because the claw has reach so i can hit them out of range and then they are forced to move and take the extra damage, gives me modes to interact, either forcing them to stay put by spending spell slots, or discouraging them from moving without spending spell slots.
it'd be mostly for low levels because obviously extra attack scales better.

>>52669289
>offhand attacks benefit from extra attack

Does this mean a level 20 dual-wield Fighter will have access to 8 attacks per action/bonus action, and the potential for 12 if they Action Surge?

Because if so, then no. That's way too much reliable damage when they're already balanced around having 5 attacks at most.

File: 1491016446930.png (2MB, 1060x810px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1060x810px

>>52669324
i only have a couple.

>>52669510
I believe the intention with the UA pact blade weapons is that they have their effect on any hit and only the extra damage requires a spell slot. It can be read either way.

>>52669438
Why do so many people that don't know the first thing about 4e insist on criticizing it?

File: 1459080169194.jpg (993KB, 1179x960px) Image search: [Google]

993KB, 1179x960px

>>52669530
Thanks, friend.

>>52669531
Nope, clause rules mean that the extra effect occurs when the spell slot is consumed.

>>52669531

>When you hit a creature with it, you can expend a spell slot to deal an additional 2d8 necrotic damage to the target per spell level, and you can reduce the creature’s speed to 0 feet until the end of your next turn.

I'm pretty sure the reduction is part of the smite, no save to make your speed 0 only an attack roll's cost is pretty fucking bullshit.

>>52669365
Would it though?

>>52669289
Reword it as "When you make a bonus action attack with two weapon fighting, you attack twice" and you might have something remotely balanced.

File: 1490895425793.png (283KB, 649x671px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 649x671px

>>52669573
and the other one.

>>52669594
What doujin is this from again?

>>52669574
Consider: The moonbow always had advantage against lycanthropes.

The Mace of Dispater is a fucking mace.

The Claw of Acamar is pretty powerful as a reach 1d8 one-hander, but GOO has no business being in melee.

>>52669579
>When you hit a creature with it,
>you can expend a spell slot to deal an additional 2d8 necrotic damage to the target per spell level,
>and you can reduce the creature’s speed to 0 feet until the end of your next turn.
See what I mean?

>>52669510
Booming Blade is already on the warlock list, no need for a feat or a racial.

You need Spell Sniper to abuse Booming Blade with Claw of Acamar's reach. The range on Booming Blade is 5 feet, not touch, so it doesn't extend with your weapon's reach. Spell Sniper doubles the 5 to 10 though.

>>52669610
hmm, i was going with a human so i could make him a variant human and pick it off, although that kind of makes it less useful. hmm, hmmm.

>>52669609
>>When you hit a creature with it,
>>you can expend a spell slot to deal an additional 2d8 necrotic damage to the target per spell level,
>>and you can reduce the creature’s speed to 0 feet until the end of your next turn.
>See what I mean?
The order of abilities would be reversed if the speed reduction was not intended to be part of the pseudo-smite.

>>52666788
>/5eg/ Mega Trove
How/where do I make new submissions to get cleaned?

>>52669625
Use variant human to get Spell Sniper to make the trick work. You still get a bonus cantrip from any list as long as it requires an attack roll. You can already access Booming Blade as a warlock, but Booming Blade is a valid pick for Spell Sniper's bonus cantrip too.

>>52668360
I wrote up a system for naval combat using skill challenges from 4e but im hesitant to post it because its not 100% solid and still work in progress.

The basics were i picked a challenge DC, failing meant damaging the players ship while success damaged the enemy ship. Once either side won they could either board and do a normal combat or just straight up destroy for no loot.

If people are interested i can post the doc but its again WIP.

>>52669626
>They would write UA abilities coherently.
UA abilities are supposed to be overpowered, and not tuned for multiclassing. These weapons would suck if they're only useful when you smite with them using the warlock's slot progression.

Anyway, there's a comma that wouldn't be needed if they were both part of the smite ability.

>>52666867
I hate this so much, the only time people have played to their INT is when I played with a barbarian.

>>52669289
gwm (or another feat added) needs to be changed so any melee or unarmed attack has access to power attack. this would also help make dual wielding more viable.

i would probably tack on to dual wielder being able to make the offhand attack without consuming your bonus action, because there is way too much stuff that competes for bonus actions.

File: giphy (7).gif (940KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

940KB, 500x500px

What are the rules on skeletons wearing other armor and weapons than detailed in the MM?

>>52669602
kinku's Jiyuukenkyuu Bitch Report, for some reason i thought it was another author.

>>52669609
>Consider: The moonbow always had advantage against lycanthropes.

Your example is counter to your argument. The lycanthrope clause is constantly on, and it occurs before the "spend a spell slot" sentence.

Look at Curse Bringer. It lets you switch the target of your Hexblade Curse to a different creature should you kill the initial cursebearer yourself. It also occurs before the spell slot sentence.

The permanent effects of the weapons, which are always on and can be considered "on hit", occur before the spell slot component of the description.

R8 my early drafts of magic items.

Claw that lets you do a pouncing attack from being hidden or if the enemy hasn't acted yet, triples jump distance, +2d6 damage, athletics contest to knock prone. Designed for use by a barbarian.

Cloak that allows you to cast rope trick by draping it over your arm. Creates a tent flap portal to a pocket dimension. 4 charges, lasts 2 hours per charge, regains 1d4 charges per day.

>>52669665
You realize that the comma is there to break up the sentence, right? There are two concepts attached to the expense of a spell slot, 2d8 (whatever) damage and an additional effect.

>They would write UA abilities coherently

implying their humanities degrees aren't being put to use writing proper sentences.

>>52669651
I'd love to see your doc anon.

My ideas for rules generally rely on stating the ships and applying some sort of attunement bonuses to them and their captain, like they were a magic item.

>>52669666
Honestly though it's a two way problem

Low int isn't fun to play around/with. It's just stupid. 'I do this, because it's what a stupid person would do.'
Stupid barbarians are done to hell and back.

But what's more of a problem is that high int wizards often don't play as if they were intelligent.

>>52669609
>If you reduce a target cursed by your Hexblade’s Curse to 0 hit points with this sword, you can immediately change the target of the curse to a different creature. This change doesn’t extend the curse’s duration.
this effect is always on.
>When you hit a creature with this weapon, you can expend a spell slot to deal an additional 2d8 slashing damage to the target per spell level, and you can reduce the creature’s speed to 0 feet until the end of your next turn.
this is one single effect at the cost of a spellslot.

>You have advantage on attack rolls against lycanthropes with the bow.
always on, a separate effect, separated by a dot.
>When you hit a creature with it, you can expend a spell slot to deal an additional 2d8 radiant damage to the target per spell level.

>The weapon has the reach property.
again, each property is separated by a dot.
>When you hit a creature with it, you can expend a spell slot to deal an additional 2d8 necrotic damage to the target per spell level, and you can reduce the creature’s speed to 0 feet until the end of your next turn.

otherwise it would read,
>The weapon has the reach property, and you can reduce a the creature's speed to 0 feet until the end of your next turn, when you hit it with it.


Also to my first inquire, it just mentions a creature being hit with it, not hit by a melee attack. So I guess i could smite out of booming blade with it regardless?

>you must make a melee attack with a weapon against one creature within the spell's range, otherwise the spell fails. On a hit, the target suffers the attack's normal effects, and ...

on the other hand paladin's smite read,
>when you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack,
so no idea if it has been ruled otherwise in the past.

>>52669736
Um, why do the claws only work if the enemy is surprised? Can they somehow sense that there's someone nearby who's not aware of you? Actually, even that wouldn't explain it, because you can be hidden from a non-surprised enemy. Anyway, the claws would cause no end of complaints as to when they can be used and why the user can't just jump and claw with them every turn, and they're best scrapped entirely.

The cloak is just kind of confusing. Also, the fact that Rope Trick goes up instead of sideways is part of what not makes it crazy broken, since a portal pointing straight down isn't a great way to shoot at enemies from your completely unassailable sniper's nest. As is, it's very powerful, probably too much so.

File: matt smith smurf.jpg (98KB, 800x900px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 800x900px

>>52669551
People are arseholes, generally.
More specifically, bad marketing. Most of the bad rep of 4e derives not from it's mechanics, but from the bad first impression it made. The marketing and the way the books were written, being very light on fluff and heavy on raw mechanics, and some of the language used, just turned off a lot of people before they ever actually played the game.

File: ShipsPublic.pdf (117KB, 1x1px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 1x1px

>>52669798
Here it is.

Ive used it a bit for my pirate game. The numbers for DCs seem to be a little wonky but ultimately ive found it more fun as a story telling device than just circling about exchanging cannon fire. The idea here was to try to let everyone do cool things and tell the story and create somthibg movie-like

>>52669724
Those effects have their own separate clause because they do not occur when you hit a creature. They are my example for "The weapon is supposed to always have an effect."

>>52670014
I wanted a limitation so that the claws couldn't just be spammed all the time. I also want something more creative than a +1 weapon. The ability is supposed to be inspired by a hunter leaping from somewhere into its prey. I think this encourages slightly different play to get that effect, and the surprised portion makes it work once in a while unconditionally.

As far as the cloak goes, my party is running skt, and I want to give them a familiar place to rest. A "hub world" or "base camp" if you will, since the module involves a lot of overworld travel. Any suggestions on how to make this work, or how you would change either of these?

Eberronfags, do you prefer the 3.5 dragonmarks, the 4e dragonmarks, or a combination between the concepts?

Have any of you converted them?

>>52669787
>You realize that the comma is there to break up the sentence, right? There are two concepts attached to the expense of a spell slot, 2d8 (whatever) damage and an additional effect.
Yes, the comma breaks up the sentence into two concepts attached to "when you hit a creature with this weapon"

>>52669308
Oh so it's worse in where it imposes some random effect that would force a DM to metagaming instead of attack the highest threat gotcha. I'd be less annoyed if you just wanted straight up MMO style aggro system.

then again the other fucking problem with the claw of acamar is that it's a fucking Str weapon on a 'DC control' chassis.

>>52670014
>>52670153
Also if anything I would say this is weaker than a regular rope trick. It is harder to hide. Also the portal is invisible, but could still be detected with magic.

>>52670179
I'll add,
>or the UA dragonmarks?

File: c3a56a18c76eed277b640acf266ebfc3.jpg (455KB, 1181x995px) Image search: [Google]

455KB, 1181x995px

>>52670016
Even the art helped to scare people away. The gear got a little wackier, the colors got a little gaudier, monstrous-looking races were the next big thing, and in general it felt a little less grounded and a little more... polygonal?

>>52670184
For the ones that deal damage, it makes the source of the damage more threatening while only actually dealing more damage when the defender is ignored. For the ones like the shielding aegis, it just further makes other targets less appealing. For the Warden, you're just fucked.

>>52670184

The creature can choose to ignore it and risk the chance of punishment (Outside the paladin, none of them are certain). That and if you go for other people, the defender very quickly becomes one of the biggest threats. As they tend to be very damn good at fucking up people in revenge for hurting allies.

>>52670153
It'd make sense if they worked as magic weapons all the time and helped you jump farther all the time, and they just got a bonus against surprised enemies. That'd make a degree of sense, and it'd prevent awkward situations like having to pull out a different weapon on round 2 because your claws sudden'y turned limp and useless after round 1, or waiting until a surprised enemy is on the far side of a chasm you need to cross because you can only jump far enough when the claws are "turned on." Also, please note that not a lot of players want to go in for two-weapon fighting because it's not as good as swinging a big two-handed beatstick or using a shield.

File: 10 int.png (165KB, 303x311px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 303x311px

>>52670068
>stop posting your shitty homebrew reeeeee
Looks good overall, actually

>>52670225
>>52670248
So once again it's punishing any DM that would play his smart monsters as such and would target squisher/high damage PCs first.

>>52670294
It's called making the defender worthwhile. It's not instant death.

>>52670294

Do you also concider hold person and sleep to be punishing the GM?

As the limitation for the fighter is 'I can keep you from moving away from me'.

>>52670248
But if you go for the defender, all those other people who you'd rather be killing will do the same thing, because they're equally useful whether you're attacking them or not as long as they're still alive. So in the end it really doesn't matter who gets attacked first. The defender gets the illusion of being useful whether he's being attacked or not, when in fact it's all meaningless.

>>52670294
I'm no fan of 4e but I like the idea of a defender role punishing someone for attacking his allies. You don't metagame it, you let dumber monsters take the punishment, middling intelligence enemies figure it out after being hit a few times, and smart enemies either know already or learn after 1 time they need to circumvent the defender.

>>52670325
>The defender gets the illusion of being useful whether he's being attacked or not, when in fact it's all meaningless.

...what?

>>52670339

Most 4e defenders didn't have perfect marks so a smart enemy COULD get around it.

Fighters can't do shit if you get outside their reach (Knocking them back worked well) for example.

>>52670277
The player is already well invested into twf which is why I'm trying to do this in the first place. I'm essentially trying to take a ring of jumping and slap it on a weapon with some cool flavor. Always on seems too strong. Your other statement about being turned on isn't relevant because jumping doesn't increase your speed, it would make more sense for players to just chase someone down anyways.

>>52669703
Same rules as anyone else using weapon?

>>52670321
You see how that's circular reasoning? You're assuming the very thing you're trying to argue, namely that there needs to be a "defender" in charge of aggro management. "Of course there needs to be aggro, because otherwise how would the tank draw aggro?"

There was an argument about invisibility yesterday, sparked by magic missile. I'm disappointed that no one ended it by pointing out you cannot target magic missile at a creature you cannot see, even if you know where they are.

>>52670398
Most people smart enough for that realized it was "I teleport behind you, pssh, nothing personal kid" argument in the first place.

>>52670341
If the defender gets attacked, he's like "aha, I've got you now!" If he doesn't get attacked, he's like "aha, I've got you now!" No matter what happens, the defender always thinks the enemy just walked into his brilliant trap, but in reality he's just a guy who plays differently depending on whether he's being attacked or not, with neither state being much more advantageous than the other.

>>52670426
Sounds like a nice way to differentiate classes to me.

>>52670426

Yes, that's kinda the point of them. They put you between a rock and a hard place as they give you two shit options.

>>52670394
It's not circular. There is no aggro. It's just making the meat shield feel more invested in the game. The crown paladin's bodyguard mechanic is awful.

>>52670455
You're switching terms to disguise the hollowness of your argument. Whether you call him a tank, a defender, a meat shield, or what have you, it's not a given that he needs to be able to do that stuff, and you shouldn't take it as a given.

>>52670322
No because you get to make saves where as from what I've read this is a
>I do X to guy he now attacks me or Y happens to him

It's lazy and assumes that it is a needed mechanic when the survivability of PCs in 5e is already huge. Unless there was a saving throw say each attack made against the person who used it or anytime the bad guy takes damage from someone other than the user it's wanting a aggro mechanic without calling it that.

>>52670482

Then what purpose DOES a guy with sword and board have that 'Guy with a two handed sword' wouldn't do better?

>>52670482
The guy who protects people needs to do something, or you do not have a guy who protects people. The guy who protects people is a fantasy staple, so you can't just leave it out.

>>52670426
I... don't see the problem? Selecting the correct target to mark and positioning yourself /setting up the catch 22 is the fun part.

Marking is also something defenders do _on top of their normal actions_. It's, at best, half of the character.

>>52670451
Except neither option is really all that shit. You can attack a guy who's 10% harder to hit than everyone else, or you can kill the high-priority target and let the armored guy be a little better at hitting shit. One defender is overall about as functional as one character of a different kind. If it were otherwise, then defenders would be extremely overpowered, when in fact only a couple of them are overpowered for reasons unrelated to the nature of their role.

>>52670511
Little more AC and with a feat can use the shield offensively, also I see that you have a very narrow view of what a fighter using a shield should be and do. That seems to be the core of the issue here

>>52670511
>Protection fighting style
>Shield mastery feat
>Extra AC
Half-Orc with shield mastery makes it so you are very unlikely to ever die to a single powerful attack from any source.

>>52670515
Fighters can pick a fighting style that lets them use a shield to impose disadvantage on an attack to an ally within 5 feat of them.

>>52670496
>. Unless there was a saving throw say each attack made against the person who used it or anytime the bad guy takes damage from someone other than the user it's wanting a aggro mechanic without calling it that.

There is a saving throw like mechanic. It's the fighter's attack roll. If you use an AC buff or resistance granting ability you can ignore punishment.

>>52670549
But why would the enemy attack you, when the two handed sword/polearm guy is doing twice as much damage as you?

Your high HP and AC make you the literal worst target for attacks. At least barbarians take damage.

And spells still fuck you.

>>52670556

That ability honestly makes me really annoyed they went back to saves for 5e. It would have been a lot more functional if they'd stuck with spells being attacks vs ref or will or such.

>>52670560
>It's the fighters attack roll
>Fighter now doesn't attack the guy marked and instead goes after everything else thus making it locked

Yeah no

>>52670556
They can also get the sentinel feat. It all still exists in 5e. They can also frighten and goad enemies with battle master dice.

I just realized Protector Aasimar Druid can let you wild shape into a flying reef shark for maximum Sharknado

>>52670648
Where does the flying come from?

>>52670068
Awesome!

>>52670556
It's fucking useless mate. It takes your reaction and it only works against the guys standing right next to you.

>>52670603
Sentinel only gives you a single attack when they attack someone else, (which makes it really useless with your onehanded weapon as you level, as that single hit does not scale; I bet that balor is going to be impressed by your average 10-12 damage on an opportunity!) and still do not help against spells.

>>52670648
Dammit druids. And Aasimar. Stop injecting your syfy into my fantasy.

>>52670581
Spam protection on the guy using the two handers so all enemies have disadvantage to hit them. They will probably have 16+ AC anyway as they use strength to attack so they will wear at least chainmail so hitting them with disadvantage is harder than hitting the shield guy with 18+ AC.

>Spells fuck you
What can you do. Have your buddy counterspell or just take it like a bitch. That's the flaw of fighters and pretty much everyone. Shield master gives you a much better chance of not getting fucked by breath weapons and spells. You take 0 damage if you succeed on those DEX tests and you can add your shields AC to the test.

>>52670674
4e fighters had the same balancing act, and also couldn't retaliate for area or close attacks.

>>52670698
>Spam protection on the guy using the two handers so all enemies have disadvantage to hit them.

You have ONE reaction. You can do it ONCE.

>>52670714
They could, however, retaliate for ranged spells. Something 5e fighters can't. As (most good) spells are not attacks.

>>52670667
Protector Aasimar, Radiant Soul. Fly Speed and +1 to Wisdom

I was going to argue in favor of marking for a tank character, but honestly after reading the class Battlemaster does it pretty well.

Choose protection as your fighting style.
Take Heavy Armor Master and maybe Shield Master.
Take some of the following maneuvers: disarming attack, goading attack, maneuvering attack, menacing attack, parry, pushing attack, rally, trip attack.

This makes you a very active defender. You can stick next to someone to protect them with your shield, or go out and 'mark' a target with goading attack. Rally lets you grant THP to allies to soften blows, maneuvering and/or pushing attack allow you to get allies out of danger, menacing attack is a fuck you debuff for anything that uses attack rolls, and so on.

Really the only thing I'd add to make it a better tank is some way to move as a reaction, to protect an ally. Probably a maneuver:

Intervene: When another creature you can see targets an ally with an attack, you can expend a superiority die and use your reaction to move up to half your speed toward your ally. If you end your movement within 5 feet of your ally, they increase their AC for that attack by the amount rolled on your superiority die.

It's worded poorly, but the concept is there. Add that in and battlemaster would be a great tank.

Should I go Oath of Vengeance or Treachery?

File: battletothedeath.jpg (340KB, 1041x1514px) Image search: [Google]

340KB, 1041x1514px

>>52669352
I had the same thing happen man...

>Getting ready to run curse of strahd.
>Present Book to Group as they roll their characters, showing off Strahd on the cover.
> My brother "Oh hey. Look there's a vampire on the front."
>One of our friends then replies " Maybe there's a lot of undead?"
>Then it turns into a debate of "How many Anti-Undead characters can we roll to be efficient"
>I'm suddenly having to deal with 2 Clerics, a Paladin and a Fuck you Undying Light Warlock.

>Did I mention they are all Dwarves?

>>52670116
>>52670182

How autistic are you? The two effects in the sentence relate to spending a spell slot.

If they wanted it to be an effect that occurs whenever you manage to hit the target, why wouldn't they put it in the general description for the invocation, like they did with Moon Bow or Curse Bringer? That's the point I was trying to make.

You're too attached to making sure a mechanic that wouldn't be balanced (knocked prone/0 speed until the end of their next turn with no save, on an attack roll. gimme a fucking break) is "RAW", when doing so is a strenuous task in willful ignorance.

If you really want to have it, sure, whatever, it's your life. But don't tell people that it's the way it's supposed to be.

>>52670218
I'm actually not sure if I agree about the art. Pathfinder's iconic artist is Wayne Reynolds, and he's actually worked for Blizzard making WOW art. And he did a ton of third edition art, he was the main Eberron artist. And I'm pretty sure he did one of the 4e covers too. The 4e art was not particularly different from third edition art or from PF art. It's was no more or less "polygonal" than it was before.

>>52670809
Sounds badass. Strahd would get the biggest boner over getting to fuck with a bunch of holier than thou dwarves. I'd love to DM that.

>>52670809
While the obvious metagaming would annoy me running with an all dwarf party sounds fantastic.

>>52670756
Is the Fly Speed maintained through Wildshape? I thought you didn't have access to certain things when you shift into different forms.

>>52670809
A holy Dwarf party sounds kinda fun. Good backstory opportunities. Do an Underdark based "entering the mists" to get them there.

Adjust to find non-undead mobs for them to fight but my main problem with CoS is its severely limited ecology. Throw in anything but make it "spookier"

File: 5eg anon reads the phb.png (557KB, 700x483px) Image search: [Google]

557KB, 700x483px

>>52669324

File: read the book nyan.jpg (733KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

733KB, 1920x1080px

>>52670961

File: read the book you fucks.jpg (697KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

697KB, 1920x1080px

>>52670991

>>52670907
>>52670923
Fun. Yes. They wanted to meta. So I pulled my Deck of Many Things out of my desk drawer and threw it on a table.

> " You have a choice. Draw one. Two. Or Three Cards. Or don't draw at all."

They all chose to draw.

What's going to be funny, is the Paladin, who immediately has to Fight an Avatar of Death when he gets into the Death House. At level 1.

One of the clerics lost all of his Land, Holdings, Gold and Renown, which... Didn't mean anything at level 1. He then lost 10,000 XP but then drew the -2 Penalty to Saving throws card.

The other cleric drew the Flames card. In which I'll harass him throughout the campaign with an Imp. That will move in conjunction with Strahds turns and if they don't stop him, he will spoil their fortune roll locations, and slowly keep upgrading up the hierarchy of Devilkind.

The Undying light warlock drew the Fates Card... Which I think will be interesting to see how he uses it.

>>52670394

Look, here's the thing: We want battles to look like something out of a fantasy novel, where the heroic knight/barbarian/whatever goes toe-to-toe with the big monster to hold most of its attention, the rogue hangs out at the edge of combat to make dirty attacks while dodging the occasional blow, and the wizard holds back from the fray while dropping spells to hurt and limit the monster. But if we don't have something like aggro, combat degenerates into a clusterfuck with everyone clustered together as monsters move in to attack the squishy players, and the fighters follow to attack the monsters

So we go "okay, we need some way to make monsters focus on the frontline knights/fighters/barbarians" and find a way to justify it for each class. And kind of "you must attack me" mechanic is easily justifiable - you just need to remember that even the smartest enemies don't have perfect judgement, knowledge, or morale.

"RARGLEBLARGLE FITE ME IRL" is perfectly natural from a dude with a fuckoff-hueg sword - he's making yourself seem like the biggest threat on the battlefield, the thing they need to focus on first. "I am the light of Pelor, and I am your foe!" is perfectly reasonable for a paladin - she's channeling divine power in a self-sacrificing effect, drawing attention to yourself while dropping divine inconvenience on those who ignore you in favor of your allies. "If you take your eyes off of me to hit my allies, I'm gonna shank you real good" is a fine mechanic for any fighter-type - and enemies, lacking perfect rationality, will generally favor "not getting stabbed right now" even if it does somewhat decrease their overall odds of victory.

File: read the book desu.png (284KB, 1280x738px) Image search: [Google]

284KB, 1280x738px

>>52671013

>>52671015
I mean, at least you won't have to deal with the Paladin.

File: i love the dmg.png (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

>>52671046

>>52670674
The paladin in my party has managed to make successful use of the protection fighting style at least once in every fight so far.

File: i love the phb.png (196KB, 901x382px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 901x382px

>>52671071

File: come-get-the-phb.gif (156KB, 540x281px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 540x281px

>>52671096

>>52671081
As opposed to making use of the other fighting styles every single time you are attacked or attack.

File: dwarf.jpg (186KB, 1280x808px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 1280x808px

>>52671054
It's going to be "Who can Hit who first." But the fun thing... is that the players don't know what will happen should they try to help him...

File: I don't need the PHB.gif (423KB, 419x304px) Image search: [Google]

423KB, 419x304px

>>52671114

>>52671116
>saves warlock from hill giant boulder, preventing ~21 damage
>could have taken dueling instead to deal 4 extra damage a round
I thinks it's pretty good honestly. Not saying the others aren't good too though.

>>52671121
Are you going to play it out like a quickdraw shoot out type thing, or just an initiative test? Because the former has some interesting possibilities.

>>52670674
>What do you mean I can't magically protect people all around while using a sword and shield!

Yep we're done here I fully believe you are nothing but bait at this point.

File: learn to read.png (257KB, 865x287px) Image search: [Google]

257KB, 865x287px

>>52671152

File: mfw 5e.png (283KB, 540x304px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 540x304px

>>52671198

>>52671170
What I mean is you have no way to punish an enemy spellcaster for casting fireball even if you are standing right in his fucking face. Unless you have that magehunter thing.

In which case you can hit him once with your non-scaling damage attack.

And after you did, he can walk away because it's not, RAW an opportunity attack. This is after spending 2 feats and your single fighting style one being a guy who protects allies/punishes enemies.

This is a huge fucking hole in 5e-s tactics.

You are not bothered by this. That's fine. I am, so I just play 4e instead.

File: what would you do for the phb.jpg (170KB, 1024x606px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 1024x606px

>>52671233
>>52671253

>>52671277
Why are these all anime shit?

File: why haven't you read the phb.png (361KB, 759x392px) Image search: [Google]

361KB, 759x392px

>>52671277

File: woolie dnd.png (423KB, 637x358px) Image search: [Google]

423KB, 637x358px

>>52671305

>>52671162
I was going to try to isolate him with the young boy, in which the Avatar then appears. It will mimic his actions, so if he surges forward to hit it, it will also strike. Knowing him. He's a "MUST SMITE" kinda guy.

I'm going to offer him a choice. He can roll initiative v initiative, or his DEX versus the Avatars. (He doesn't know the stats) I figure it's the easiest way I can let him feel that he is "choosing" his fate. So to speak.

It will also present an opportunity for the Warlock to blow his Fates card, to reverse the Paladins fate. Should he fail.

My intent is to not TPK the party and I've already made adjustments to the campaign to cater to a "Holy Squad" but this isn't going to be Radiance Smite City Kill-everything-that-moves.

File: woolie phb.png (211KB, 629x334px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 629x334px

>>52671324
And I'm spent.

>>52670926
Your new shape keeps all things your original race if your new shape is capable of reproducing them.

File: eater of Despair.webm (970KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

970KB, 640x360px

Alright, /5eg/, I'm about to pop my Wizard cherry. What's the most fun Wizard class and how to play them?

>>52671245
>What is friendly caster uses counter spell
>Multiclass a couple levels into monk use stunning strike

So my last question is if you play 4e then why the fuck are you here whining about this when the system doesn't run like 4e but you feel it should?

>>52669352
Deus Vult, anon. Deus Vult.

>>52668835
So... +1 per int modified as opposed to... just learning them naturally?

Some backgrounds and race combinations easily allow you to have like half the languages, and then it takes what, a year to learn another?

Not to mention how pointless half languages are, since if you have to communicate with them, the GM should provide an in-game reason for how they can do that. A GM requiring the party can talk to Mind flayers is a fucking retard, especially if he just assumes that is the wizards job. As if Wizards needed MORE reasons to be in the spotlight.

And of course, in all cases we also have the wonderful little spell that allows you to talk with literally anything with a language, and another that allows you to talk even with those that DOESN'T have a language.

And both of them are low level spells.

>>52671560
lore mastery
if your DM doesn't allow UA, abjuration is a fun defensive wizard. divination is a meme but a fun one that your DM will see from a mile away. necromancy is cool for minions.

>Get a Robe of Eyes
>Say I'll take it
>Get into combat and suddenly remember the fighter has a sunsword and the sorcerer likes to spam sunbeam
This should be fun

>>52671301
Because they're made by Pathfinder players

>>52671578
>What is friendly caster uses counter spell

Since we are talking about a caster, you know he can just counterspell that as well, right?

I mean, I guess your ally made him waste a counterspell, good going.

>Multiclass a couple levels into monk use stunning strike

Touché, I'll concede that the fighter can defend allies if he multiclasses monk.

>So my last question is if you play 4e then why the fuck are you here whining about this when the system doesn't run like 4e but you feel it should?

Because you were wrong on the internet. No other reason.

I unironically liked 4e, and wish 5e was balanced as well.

>>52670581
>But why would the enemy attack you, when the two handed sword/polearm guy is doing twice as much damage as you?
This is why the high AC builds are pointless, unless you also have the ability to output as much damage as the wizard or paladin or whatever. Why would enemies attack Sir Bulkhead Irondick when there's other people that a) aren't walking slabs of metal and protective magic and b) are a bigger threat to the enemy's life? The answer is, they wouldn't unless they're literal retards.

Look at the 5e barbarian. They get abilities based around taking less damage (rage, d12 hit dice, unarmoured defense that puts more focus on Con), but this is supplemented by abilities that increase damage output so they're still threatening (focus on Strength weapons, rage damage, battlefield mobility, reckless attack).

>>52671767
Dumb 4rrie.

>>52671767
4e made sacrifices to be balanced, mostly with all classes following a similar formula.

>>52669352
The Barovian Crusades Begin

>>52671810
Why is that a sacrifice? 5e has the same uniform class framework, it's just more open ended.

I do prefer the 5e framework, but I prefer the contents of 4e.

File: 151c2d21a3bb73b2380dd7686e9f6d91.jpg (64KB, 634x900px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 634x900px

>>52671820
Deus vult!

>>52671810
Meh, essentials martials are basically slightly more powerful/versatile 5e martials.

Can someone clarify the rules on possession for me?
I was DMing Death House the other day, and the party's wizard ended up getting possessed by one of the ghosts of the children. The module says to let the possessed player retain control of their character, but does it still imply all of the other effects of being possessed? i.e., can the wizard no longer use any of his magic until he gets rid of the ghost?

Furthermore, if there's a specific action that needs to happen for the ghost to go away, would the possessed player know what that action is? What if the ghost doesn't know what that action is?

>>52671343
>He can roll initiative v initiative, or his DEX versus the Avatars

Wouldn't those be the same roll? d20+DEX mod. Assuming he doesn't have the +5 to Initiative feat.

File: read the fucking manual.jpg (320KB, 500x572px) Image search: [Google]

320KB, 500x572px

>>52669324

>>52667719
1.39 players per 5e game? What?

Anyone have the Total Partykill Handbook?
is it any good?

>>52672275
One player can be in multiple games

The 3.5 and PF numbers are almost the same because their players play both at the same time.

>>52671845
Well, a mystic, druid, rogue, paladin and warlock all have completely different progressions, whereas 4e has a more uniform set-up where everyone, caster or martial has a few at-wills, some encounters, some one-a-day with a bit of variation, but they're all ultimately quite similar effects like 'teleport and then stab shit' as opposed to 'teleport away and cast a firebolt at shit', and then everyone's out of combat utility seems to follow a similar formula through however rituals work.

Yes, there's a difference going on, and it's balanced, but abilities don't really feel quite as unique. Even if some people are better at healing, everybody has a heal somewhere.

>>52666867
Have you ever actually SEEN PC's in action?

>>52672036
Hey buddy. Death House can be a seriously rough deal for a new DM. You really should have your basics covered

Possession does not affect class abilities, only character.
You could figure out that one way to put souls to rest is to lay their remains into their proper place. A moderate DC 13 Religion should be enough to figure that out.

Other ways to do it, like through Arcana or something could reveal Protection From Evil and Good, and Dispel Evil and Good can also aid or break possessions

>>52667787
I've never had a problem "pulling aggro" as a Moon Druid tank dropping concentration spells and Conjures.

>>52669352
Fucking adventure drops so much Paladin loot you might as well have a team of full God Jocks.
Those who don't get the sun's word or the symbol, still gain +2 swords or plates, or class specific items that have min Cha requirement for multiclassing

>>52667787
I've never had a problem tanking as a shield master Battlemaster with protection FS, Maneuvering strike, and pushing attack.

File: spells.png (507KB, 914x2248px) Image search: [Google]

507KB, 914x2248px

>>52672329

> whereas 4e has a more uniform set-up where everyone, caster or martial has a few at-wills, some encounters, some one-a-day with a bit of variation

Essentials classes. And to a lesser extent, psionics.

Also, 5e classes are a lot more uniform than you think, it's just made less obvious.

> but they're all ultimately quite similar effects like 'teleport and then stab shit' as opposed to 'teleport away and cast a firebolt at shit'

If I wanted to, I could find more powers in 4e that do unique shit than there are currently spells in 5e.

>>52668425
Pure warlock with charlatan background.

>>52672371
>Possession does not affect class abilities, only character

The description for possession by ghosts int he MM says "It otherwise uses the possessed target's statistics, but doesn't gain access to the target's knowledge, class features, or proficiencies." Doesn't that include a class' spell casting ability? Is spellcasting not a class feature for wizards?

>>52671017
It's impossible to make such broad blanket statements about enemies in a game like this. Some of them are brilliant, some of them are rather dim but still possessed of some experience and sense of judgment, and others are complete automata. A system that tries to get them to all act the same way for the sake of game balance is going too far. It stops being anything other than a game where numbers happen.

>>52672036
Possession by those ghosts, specifically, just gives the flaw and they can't leave Death House. That's it

>>52672520
That's exactly why marks are good, while taunts are shit. Marks let the enemy decide.

Am I faggot for giving my rogue a rapier and hand crossbow instead of dual daggers? I've never played rogue before and it seemed cool, but my new group looked at me weird when I said I don't have dual daggers.

>>52672439
>>52671987
I don't really get the essentials thing. Not that I know them properly, but what do they do different?

In any case, having lots of unique shit alone isn't enough. I mean, for example, I've heard someone mention 'bloody path' where you can make all the enemies opportunity attack themself. But it's likely harder to fit into lower fantasy games (But I guess that's a different gripe where you start wondering about the semantics of 'what is an encounter' and all that) and, I mean, you could just have a spell that attacks in an area and takes away reactions. And there probably is. And some class somewhere could probably do that.

Or, say, the wizard can create difficult terrain. But the assassin can conjure up a load of ... Whatever it was, might be shroud or some sort of smoke terrain things.

You'll have to forgive me, I don't have a lot of experience with the system, but it's quite hard to describe it. It's... Yes, I've got all sorts of shit I can do, but it doesn't feel special because EVERYTHING is crazy shit.

>>52667722
>the new UA on downtime and finding magic items relying on Persuation checks

someone redpill me on this UA. If I'm a rogue, and I want to steal some shit, I have to make stealth and deception checks, fine. I might have to spend some time casing the place as well.

But what if I'm a wizard with invisibility, shapeshifting, enchantment, and divination spells? I still just make those same 3 rolls?

>>52672621
>I don't really get the essentials thing. Not that I know them properly, but what do they do different?

An essentials Fighter (called Slayer if it's a striker or Knight if it's a defender) and Rogue (called Thief) only have at-will and encounter powers that are similar to the 5e battle master's maneuvers (which are essentially encounter powers with multiple uses, like the Essentials Fighter's power strike).

They basically more or less do the same things as a 5e Fighter/Rogue; go in and attack with occasionally using a skill.

Essentials classes in general (which aren't just slight tweaks to the original) take a crap on the AEDU structure.

> I mean, for example, I've heard someone mention 'bloody path' where you can make all the enemies opportunity attack themself. But it's likely harder to fit into lower fantasy games

This is why it's a level 14 ability IIRC. You are not in low fantasy past 10, in either edition.

>(But I guess that's a different gripe where you start wondering about the semantics of 'what is an encounter' and all that)

"Encounter" powers are called so because they are used once an encounter, because they recharge on a short rest that you take between encounters.

When the battlemaster fighter says something like "The battlemaster regains these martial dice after a short or long rest" that's basically a 5 times longer way to say "encounter power" (although 5e actually expects 2 encounters per short rest but it rarely works out like that).

> Yes, I've got all sorts of shit I can do, but it doesn't feel special because EVERYTHING is crazy shit.

I guess? But I think the Assassin having a smoke bomb and the wizard having grease are in theme for both. One not having it to make the other more special doesn't make much sense to me. If you want boring baselin characters who don't do crazy shit, the essentials stuff got you covered as above.

File: Dallas I'm dying.png (446KB, 893x1097px) Image search: [Google]

446KB, 893x1097px

>>52672752
Sounds like it'd be its own encounter/session.

>preplanning
>bribe some guards here and there
>detect any alarm spells
>stealthily avoid guards
>reach magic item
>guys, the thermal drill, go get it

>>52672618
Yeah your kind of a faggot for not giving your rogue dual rapiers

File: 2-greyhawk-deities.jpg (70KB, 709x284px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 709x284px

What are general pitfalls of having deities make direct contact with the PCs? My players hit level 15 and I feel like it would make it cool if players can run into the deities they've heard so much about in the past couple of years in our campaign. They even expressed the idea of interacting with them in the first few sessions.

I think it would make it neat and give some potential storylines for them especially since they think they've done it all at this point. Currently, they're chasing down a long-term BBEG who is planning to become the strongest lich ever and I'm thinking this kind of thing will have the gods want to intervene.

>>52668009
>This only takes into account games/players which were active (e.g. game was played, player played at least one game) during the 4th Quarter of 2016.
Yes, Anon, someone went through all the trouble of making this report four times a year for several years in a row and you are literally the first person to point out "hurr it's a total of all players and games, inactive or not" because only someone enrolled in a statistics class could have possibly foreseen that being a problem and devised a tabulation method that avoids such a totally obscure pitfall.

Now that you've demolished Roll20, please tell the US Navy that they'll never get a weaponized laser to work at sea because there's simply too much water vapor and salt in the air and the power requirements are too great.

>>52672797
All the Gods have better shit to do but they're also obscenely powerful so it's actually less of a hassle for them to appear to a bunch of level 15s and say "good job, here's a buff, keep up the good work" than it is for you to reply to my post with "thanks anon". Gods don't even have to go through captchas.

File: 1480029818433jpg.png (175KB, 450x424px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 450x424px

>>52672786

>>52672618
Hand crossbow and nothing else is way better than dual daggers.

Dual daggers is a literal downgrade of hand crossbow in every sense except that it doesn't need a feat.

>>52672797
Have a messenger go on their behalf. Keep the concept that gods can't just walk into the world and say 'good job' for reasons, because otherwise why don't the gods just make everything better?

>>52673267
Why don't the gods' overpowered messengers just make everything better?

>>52673354
You mean the solars?

Does anyone have the latest version of the mpmb's automated character sheet?

>>52672781
See, I'm stuck at a point where I don't really know what to say.
Most of those are good points, but it doesn't quell the fact that deep inside, It just doesn't feel right.

The DM was good. I played a bard, and played with a ranger, a wizard or maybe something also that was like a wizard and a swordmage.. fightery.. Guy. Thing.

It's not like it wasn't a good time, but there was something with the abilities not feeling as epic as they're written. I'm trying to think of some way to rationalize it, but I don't know. Maybe it's just that you can simplify abilities into categories of, say, 'area of effect damage and also this' or 'heal and attack' and you could do fine in a game system that has those but simplified.

Or, you know, maybe my opinion is wrong and I need to play it more to figure out the problem.

>>52673354
Who says the messengers are overpowered?
I like to think they could send something like a familiar down after the party, in the sense of Odin's crow not actually going and nuking the fuck out of everything but simply being there to see things, but it's messengering.

>2 new players join game (now at 6)
>One of them I'm starting to believe may be literally retarded as they blunder through the game making full retard decisions both IC and OOC

Sessions have gone from accomplishing shit at a decent pace to taking an entire session to travel a mile down a road and fight one encounter, in addition to this character actively fucking with party effectiveness through sheer stupidity when they're trying to "help".

>>52673388
Doesn't matter. "Gods can't mess with the mortal world" is a crap plot point. They're always messing with the mortal world. There mere existence messes with the mortal world.

The best way to handle it is how Mystara does it.
Gods can pop down into the mortal plane and say, "Hey, I'm God," but they are forbidden by their own godly laws (which they made up) to use their super-God powers to mess with shit, barring a few exceptions (smiting your own unfaithful or misbehaving followers, for one).

There is no power higher than themselves that will smack them down if they decide to go Full God Power on a bunch of mortals, just other Gods; theoretically, if more than half of them decided all of this was cool, they'd just beat the shit out of the other half and the whole order would change. But that's difficult because their godly cosmology isn't arranged by Good vs. Evil, and assholes and good guys are aligned together in a variety of spheres and cross-sphere coalitions that make God Politics more complex than that.

So it's against the rules to use Full God Power, but not to:
>show up as a God
>empower your Clerics and other faithful
>manifest as an extremely powerful but non-divine mortal and use all of its powers
>do the above but bang a bunch of people and produce children with supergenes who you indoctrinate into doing everything you want
>staffing entire countries with your overpowered Master Race
>sending them and their armies against the pet nations of Gods you don't like

>>52673450
kuz the guy's posting a picture from greyhawk and if we're talking about D&D gods it's either that or forgotten realms because most people don't play homebrew campaigns and in both of those the heavenly angels or whatever are overpowered

What 5th level wizard spell do I get? Already have rarys telepathic bond

>>52673493
>Most people don't play homebrew campaigns
Eh
I honestly haven't seen a single group that hasn't used their own setting aside from one. Maybe one in seven or so.

But I can believe that most people just stick to pre-made adventures.

>>52673497
Wall of force

>>52673483
I wouldn't mind seeing more god's avatars to be honest.

File: 1474619457853.jpg (25KB, 480x433px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 480x433px

>>52671761
>Since we are talking about a caster, you know he can just counterspell that as well, right?

>I mean, I guess your ally made him waste a counterspell, good going.

All I can read from this is
>Waah the bad guys have access to what the players do and I get no way to make them unable to use it

>Touché, I'll concede that the fighter can defend allies if he multiclasses monk.

He can still defend allies without it just not to the ridiculous level you think every fighter should be able to

>Because you were wrong on the internet. No other reason.
>My assumption that something should be means everyone else is wrong

Wew lad and with that you showed how autistic you are being unable to adapt to a new system.

>>52673438
I think, and please believe me that I mean no offense, that stuff being laid bare just loses its magic for you. I noticed that being the case for many people with 4e.

Which is fine. Tastes and likes are seldom rational. It's not like you can be talked into liking something you just don't like.

>>52673511

Yep Wall of Force.

It's just so tactically useful

>>52673438
Holy shit, you're willing to admit you're wrong and you're willing to compile more evidence, on tg of all places?

>>52673516

If you build stats then things are killable.

It's generally not the best model but yes historically FR has had a fuckton of Avatars active at times.

I just wouldn't want to see an entire book of CR 21-CR30 Avatars unless most of the page count was on more useful material

>>52673517
>All I can read from this is
>>Waah the bad guys have access to what the players do and I get no way to make them unable to use it

Your ability to read what you want to read is astonishing.

>My assumption that something should be means everyone else is wrong

Simply astonishing

>>52673578
Faiths and Avatars (for Forgotten Realms) exists for this purpose. Yeah, okay, every God has a 0.5-1 pages for their avatar stats, but then there's 3-5 other pages detailing everything about their history, relationships, dogma, church, special ceremonies, what they like and don't like, their specialty priest classes, the spells they teach followers, and so on.

>>52673407
Anyone?

>>52673578
Unless you build them like Tiamat, then they wouldn't nearly be as killable.

A book like that and focused on that topic would be utterly fantastic though but it does need to be supplemented with additional lore. Here's hoping for a 5e Faiths and Avatars line.

>>52672520
Assuming you're dealing with the fighter/barbarian examples up there, not the Paladin one which doesn't compel enemies at all, you've got some points! Enemies should definitely get a saving throw against the taunt-type abilities - failure means they perceive you as the biggest threat/make you their top priority/get really really pissed and focus on you, while success means they recognize that while you're badass, they probably wanna gank your friends first. Under this model,

>Brilliant
Takes a wisdom saving throw - probably with a big bonus if they're actually clever, and not just book-smart

>Dim but experienced
Makes a wisdom saving throw, same as above

>Automata
Good point! 5e doesn't have any special way of denoting mindless beep-boop types, but an obvious fix would be to note that the taunt-types don't affect truly mindless creatures - and which creatures are mindless, rather than just dumb, is noted in their MM descriptions, even if it's absent from their stat blocks. That said, you shouldn't really need it against mindless things, since they'll be fighting whatever's closest (and if they have enough capability to pick and choose targets freely, they have enough capability to be spoofed into prioritizing the wrong character.)

So, I'm playing a paladin right now in my group and my bond is to protect those who can't protect themselves.

Another PC who's a bit dense (the character, not the player) almost got us hanged by a local ruler by speaking off.

I ended up dropping him to zero with non lethal damage from behind because he wouldn't listen and I got us out of there. I ended up healing him once we were safe.
Did I do the right thing?

File: 14564156156516.jpg (139KB, 450x424px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 450x424px

>>52672976

>>52673633
>kill the avatar of a God
>it just comes back
oop

What does a first session need to accomplish? Any tips on introducing a game and a campaign?

>>52673648
>you just killed 1 avatar out of 20
>that avatar is going to come back after a while
>the others start coming after you Lian Neeson style
Oops

>>52673519
'Laid bare'? You mean, without any sort of DM description or roleplaying around the abiltiies?

Once you get to the point where you're using all these abilities every turn, it's kind of hard to do a description for every single one, and even if you did, it'd be like the special effects in agame where it's cool to hear it but it becomes more repetitive background noise on repeat.

Probably doesn't help if you start at a level where you have a whole load of abilities already anyway.

>>52673638
You defended the towns people from a group of adventurers who would have been forced to fight IMO. Oath checks out.

Or

You didn't Not defend anyone so oath checks out.

>>52673587
Here's the problem at this point all I've gotten from this discussion is a handful of points
>You want a way to force enemies to attack you
>You are upset that a sword and board build isn't as powerful as a previous edition
>You want your sword and board build to work like MMO tank abilities but not actually be that

Correct me if I've missed something because this has been going on all thread and at this point it's a little silly.

>>52673681
Background on the setting
Individual motives
How the characters meet
Quest giver
Then traveling to the destination and building character trust and comradery
Then end it at the dungeon entrance to make your players want to come back

>>52673695
My oaths actually of vengeance, to kill evil.
The ruler just wasn't evil, but was lawful neutral and didn't think a party of adventures showing up and insulting him was to his lands laws.

>>52673702
>You want a way to force enemies to attack you
I want to give an incentive for enemies to attack me to make use of my high defenses if I decide to go sword aand board, and hence protect my allies in a less direct way than just murdering everything before the wizard gets there.
>You are upset that a sword and board build isn't as powerful as a previous edition
It has nothing to do with power and everything with not being able to fill the above function reliably, either with sword and board or whatever.
>You want your sword and board build to work like MMO tank abilities but not actually be that

I want it to work like X except not? I mean, I guess I can't logically call this statement false.

>Correct me if I've missed something because this has been going on all thread and at this point it's a little silly.

Basically everything. You have been fighting strawmen this whole thread. It's been exciting, in a sort of special olympics way.