>Unearthed Arcana: Revised Class Options: http://media.wi

>>54046901
If your answer is not "Turn undead", then you've never been in combat with 15 shadows at once.

Party is a paladin, a warlock and a wizard. What do I pick?

>>54046939
Fighter, Barbarian, Druid or Cleric

How's the fight with the Abbot when he reveals his true form? Is he a harder fight than Strahd?

What are thing a hermit might know?

>>54046939
Cleric, then be bros with the Paladin, then make fun of the two arcane casters for being turbo-virgin autists.

>>54045921
>But there is nothing to suggest it wouldnt be a linear effect.
And thus it's whatever your DM decides.

If you use logic, a single holy vial should be more effective than a 1% holy water 100 vial blast because the lich only has so much surface area to cover in holy water.

>>54047156

No, Strahd is a beast.

>>54047340
>No, Strahd is a beast.
I thought Strahd's deal is he wasn't awfully strong for a boss but makes it really damn annoying by running away all the time and such.

File: IMG_0540.jpg (71KB, 599x446px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 599x446px

What are some good low level encounters I can throw at a party in a swamp? So far I've got grungs from volo's, vine blights and shambling mounds

>>54047378

I mean he's not a dragon or anything but he can easily wipe a level 8 party with his spellcasting alone.

>>54047340
>>54047378
Depends on whether you've got the sunsword or the holy symbol of ravenkind or a source of constant running water.

He regenerates 20HP per round and he has a lot of defensive spells and abilities, so he can probably find a lot of opportunities to heal if you don't have anything to weaken him.

His melee damage is indeed not too high, but he -is- a spellcaster.

>>54047418

Lizardfolk.

Bullywogs

Maybe a giant crocodile?

How do you guys go about making the quest for your main plot or just, in general, I always find I'm shit at coming up with a lot of quests that follows a major plot because I feel if only I can do one or two things with it before it's either boring or just overused.

>>54047487
Usually I come up with the setup and the goal, and the first few steps in the adventure then wait and see how it goes every session.

>>54047510
I mean I have the setup and goals I'm just having trouble figuring out the in between stuff. Maybe it's just the plot I have is shit or I'm not thinking it through enough.

The players are basically in this empire that has some disease that they sorta caused to be ravaging it and their assisting a wizard in finding a cure while in the background some society has created a bioweapon with it that only infects and kills Elves.

File: tumblr_nqty4iX5hJ1rfrksjo1_1280.png (2MB, 1000x1501px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1000x1501px

Pic related is a Morninglord devotee, Y/N?

Which rule stops an entire party, one by one, from running a perception check on the environment they are in to find things like escape routes, secret passages and other 'hidden' objects of interest, especially when the first PC fails?

File: 1498127645063.jpg (97KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 800x800px

>>54047646
Here's the question:

Why does the DM hide these things in the first place?

Why would you put content in for the players to use and then require them to arbitrarily search everything they see with perception checks to unlock the content?

Think about it a bit.

>>54047646

I don't think there's a specific rule for it as much as it's hard to imagine. You've got five people walking down a hall. Passively, they are all perceiving things. One guy decides he wants to take a closer look at the walls. No one else, at that time, cares about the walls. The guy rolls, DM says he doesn't find anything. Then EVERYONE else in the party decides to stop what they're doing and investigate that one spot of wall the guy was just looking at because...? It's metagamey and silly to imagine.

>>54047646
Quantum ogres that appear when they try.

>>54047672
To make characters with high perception and nothing else feel cool?

>>54047672
Because the content is only known by the DM (since he created it) and requires RNG mechanic for it to be found.

>>54047689
Makes sense, but is it bad on the DM's part if he puts a core piece of the story behind a dice roll?

>>54047716
>is it bad on the DM's part if he puts a core piece of the story behind a dice roll?

Short answer: yes
Long answer: yeah of course hiding core story elements is fucking stupid. Fun eastereggs and/or side lore or other non-important goodies are fine, though.

>>54047716

Only if it's a core piece. What if he just hides a magic item which isn't necessary but would be a nice bone to throw to the party? If you find it, great, if you don't, well that's on you, there'll be more magic items in the future. Or, maybe instead of magic items, something more in-universe, a bandit's hidden treasure, or some other monster's possessions squirreled away.

>>54047701
So to make perception by far the most overused stat that everybody wants to grab?

>>54047716
It's poor design to put cool things behind an arbitrary skill check you want to spam.

If you want to hide cool extras that make players feel they've really achieved something discovering it, you put clues and it's not just a simple perception check.
You describe something in the room that when investigated turns out to be something more.
You draw something on the map that turns out to be something interesting.
You put clues that follow into a secret passageway such as the layout of the room or something such as 'despite the enemies fleeing into this dead end, you can't see them anywhere'.

I honestly believe you should never let a player search for traps/secrets/whatever if they are not time pressured. Assume they do, and assume they do it well. Traps are for enemies to use against players, players to use against enemies and to add an extra element to running away/chasing enemies since they don't have the time to check for traps.

True, a trap could be used to develop a situation, but in that case you might as well just have the trap spring on the players no matter what like a railroad than promote brain-dead dungeoneering like 'I search for traps' all the time.

What did your character do last session?

Mine made a new friend and found some coded ritual book. It was a slow session.

>ywn find a true bro to do solo campaigns

File: RQ8e8Ws.jpg (336KB, 1920x1242px) Image search: [Google]

336KB, 1920x1242px

I am in need of some advice.
Our ranger made a deal with a green dragon to plant some magic seeds in specific locations. For payment he asked for some poison from the dragon who gladly obliged as it's basically free for the dragon.
It then infused some water with it's breath, making a thick green poisonous liquid which the ranger put in a container and put away for later use with his arrows. He has enough to make dozens of poisoned arrows.
The problem is, it was an ancient green dragon, but I cant just make the poison be 22d6 because that would be overkill and the ranger has enough damage already.
How the fuck do I solve this? How do I make the poison be powerful enough so it's not just worthless goop but not too strong to invalidate any future encounters?

The player understands that I have to rebalance it. He was worried he was breaking the game even as he asked for the poison from the dragon and wants just something fun but not overpowered.
The only idea I got so far is making the poison be RNG reliant, picking some conditions and damage, arranging them on a chart and rolling the effects every time he hits something with a poisoned arrow.

>>54047799
I only partially agree with you here. Traps can add a real element of danger, if they're intelligently placed, and a reward to players for diving carefully.
I guess it, as always, depends on the people you play with. My group has no problems with the occasional trap or secret room, and I try to make them spaced far enough apart as to not be obnoxious. Seems to work well for us.
As for the actual rolling, I usually go with the person in the lead can look for traps, and one additional person can help him to give advantage, if they want. If they fail looking for traps, the group stumbles into it, if they fail looking for (well hidden) secret doors, they inform their party that there doesn't seem to be anything around and they go on, none the wiser.
As you said, hinting at the presence of a trap/door is the best way to go about it, but doing so without drawing specific attention to a suspicious location is pretty difficult.

>>54047916
He has a limited supply of arrows that deal 2d8 extra poison damage.

Why the fuck is your only idea so fiddly and terrible?

>>54047952
Because I'm terrible. And basic 2d8 poison damage is terribly boring.

>>54047916
Potential ideas:
The poison's potency decays over time
The poison is meant to be breathed, so its effectiveness is reduced when watered down and administered with injury
The poison is, as a draconic ability, inherently magical, and as the source of its power is far away, its effectiveness is severely reduced
The poison as it is has a consistency not unlike mercury, which makes it near impossible to just stick to stuff by dipping it, it has to be administered with small vials on the tips of the arrows, making them unwieldy

File: boutes.png (31KB, 299x192px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 299x192px

>>54047916
>that butt town
I can only imagine the bullying their inhabitants suffer.

>Player seems to think charm means people will do literally anything for them
>DM agrees with them
>Constantly casts it on players to make them do things for him
>We do it because DM says so
F U N

>>54047646
If a character is trying to perform a not-impossible action where there's no negative consequence for failure and nothing preventing them from repeating the action over and over why are you having them roll?

>>54048033
I'm not the DM.

>>54047966
>potency decays over time
That's my excuse for nerfing it later if it proves too strong.

>making them unwieldy
Maybe that could work. If the arrow has to have a small vial of poison on the tip it could make it not as aerodynamic as regular arrows.
A flat -5 or -10 or something on attack rolls with poison arrows to offset the damage bonus? He's a hunter ranger and has a huge attack bonus anyway and usually advantage for taking action before the enemies do.

>>54048042
Another couple ideas:
Reduced potency means lower CON save for no extra damage
The poison evaporates shortly after being exposed to air, so arrows have to be dipped immediately before firing, reducing the number of attacks the ranger can make

>>54047963
Well so is 22d6, and that's what the dragon's breath weapon does.

You basically have two options:
-Add poison damage to the arrows. Doesn't have to be max damage, since the dosage is much lower than it would be in the breath weapon. Plain, simple, and the ranger has a limited amount of the arrows.
-Make monsters Con save after getting hit. If they fail they're poisoned for 1d6 rounds or something (not that OP since there are CR 1/4 monsters that can poison for an hour). The DC should be determined using the Ranger's Wis modifier (ie 8 + prof + Wis mod), since applying the poison in an effective way requires insight. Or you can just give it a flat DC of 13-14.

>>54047924
It depends on the format.
In some formats you can give plenty of information and give a few clues in the information.
For example, a map, you can put lots of detail on the map and players can ask questions about things they're not sure of. 'Why does the floor look a bit different here? It's odd'.
If a player has high passive perception, you can reward that by just telling them 'the floor is a bit off over there, the walls over here are a bit odd'.

It's crazy to ask players to actually have to say 'I check for traps' when there's no reason not to check for traps. You might as well ask players to take the 'breathe' action every six seconds.

Hiding information from players gives them less to work with and limits their decision-making ability. In turn, limiting their decision-making ability is as good as railroading the players. Not letting them see that secret passage is, in a sense, unintentional railroading. You could have given the players more choices, but you rolled a die and it said 'Yeah, hi, I'm the dice and I say not to give the players more choices.'


But as for the original question I'd say that a player can't reroll a roll that has just been done for every character. If the player has a higher modifier you can apply that instead onto the original roll or a racial difference 'I'm a dwarf, I would know this' but I'd increase the time it takes to do the check each time they try unless the roll is for something different.

>>54047916
What level are they?

Look at the single target damage spells available to the wizard, then base the damage off of those.

"Dip and shoot a single arrow" as a standard (not an attack action), and you have to use it like this because because it dries and falls off on contact with air in a few seconds.

Or eats through the arrow. Whatever.

>>54048000
Why don't you just point out the chapter of the PHB that specifically discusses the 'charmed' ailment?

>A charmed creature can’t attack the charmer or target the charmer with harmful abilities or magical effects.
>The charmer has advantage on any ability check to interact socially with the creature.

Also you have advantage on saves against Charm Person if you're fighting the charmer. It's a level 1 spell, it's not supposed to be insanely powerful.

>>54047916
2d8 extra poison damage, target can be Poisoned, it also has to make a CON save if fail his skin/armor begins to rot and loses AC

>>54048067
>>54047924
Oh, right, and, it's pretty much like this >>54048033


Though the problem with 'use the original roll but add anybody else's modifier to it' is that the people with lower modifiers will never, ever succeed.
But the fix for that is to consider the situation:
A barbarian is scarier to dumb creatures than a wizard.
A wizard is scarier to smart creatures than a barbarian.
A dwarf knows more about rocks.
The elf is standing in the correct position to see this or that, or has darkvision and thus nothing obscuring their sight.
The warlock knows more about eldritch things.
When you consider these things that often tie into background and reward a player for their character choice, it means that you can roll the die only once unless they get out a book and read it up or something. But yet still each person achieves success over others sometimes, even if the person with the highest modifier is normally the best person for it.

>>54048000
Oh, not this again.
Tell them to stop being apes.

>>54048000
>using social skill checks or spells on other PCs

Leave the group or murder the player in his sleep. It's the only way to be sure.

>>54048000
>>54048133
Actually, murder them.
Why would you adventure with someone who could at any time charm you and tell you to give them all their money?
Murder the fuck out of them and start a witchhunt against any charmers.

>>54048000
>When the spell ends it knows it has been charmed.

The character has taken a hostile action against you. Murder them or get the authorities involved.

I want to do an encounter where a Necromancer manages to summon skeletal hands from their graves that cause difficult terrain and possibly some kind of grab effect.

Is there a spell that covers something like that?

How can I make an ability that break ammunition, and other throwable weapons as a reaction (and possibly do damage to the target) work without being OP or annoying? I f it can use Ki point better but is not for a monk

>>54048000
No DnD is better than bad DnD.

>>54048234
Just fluff the entangle spell as skeletal hands instead of vines.

>>54048239
Make it free, but do it as a reaction.

>>54048239
>as a reaction
Already there

Reaction to catch thrown weapon or ammunition.
If you have not used all of your attacks this round, you may throw it back dealing it's usual damage by making a ranged attack roll against the creature who attacked you.
If you do not have an available attack, you may have the weapon drop at your feet or you may hold onto it. Ammunition is destroyed.

>>54048383
I know that, that is what in using as basis for this, what I want is a type of force/ki blast that is make before the attack and make the ammunition exploit in his face while is preparing to attack but I don't know how to make it balance, I'm ok with separate the effect as part of a level up

>>54048485
Interrupting attack actions is pretty strong.

It's either going to be 2/long, or it's going to have to provoke if you're in melee when you do it.

Ideas for high-level (lvl16-20) assault plasma rifle? 3d10? 2d10? 1d10 + 2d8?

>>54048532
D&D doesn't have plasma rifles.

3d6, ignores armor, pierces 1 target

having advantage on str or dex checks also applies to attacks?

>>54048619
No, Attack Rolls are not Ability Checks.

>>54048532
Are you lost?

>>54048485
Make a reaction that causes ammo to explode in someones face but give it a recharge on 5-6 or 6 so he can't use it for every reaction.

>>54048672
Then again I'm not sure if it's for an NPC or PC. If it's for a PC then my advice is invalid.

>>54047870
1v1d an orc eye of gruumsh after scattering caltrops to prevent any reinforcements from joining it

>Take guidance
>DM only lets me use it if I describe how it will help in that situation

>>54047185
They would obviously be very familiar with the landscape they were living in i.e. know a lot about swamps if their shack was in a swamp, etc.
They would probably know the basics of taking care of themselves or procuring goods for themselves.

>>54048778
"by giving the player a +1-+4 bonus to the thing."

I only let my players use it if they could reasonably have a moment to do it, and if it wouldn't be socially unacceptable. For instance, at a shop negotiating, the shopkeep is going to become less friendly if he sees people casting spells in the background.

>>54047870

Last session, SKT:

>Party reaches the Dripping Caves
>Fight and explore until we come across a strange stalagmite
>Black pudding comes out of it
>Literal retard at the table decides to actually drag away the two female party members
>Rest of us stay and fight it
>Party paladin crits it with a smite
>Druid dies instantly to a crit
>I hit it with Guiding Bolt for a few rounds, eventually get killing blow

The Druid and I were fairly mad at the literal retard, since had the whole party focused the thing down, it'd have died in two rounds and the Druid would not have been killed.

>>54048778
>be bard
>DM only lets me cast if I play an instrument during my turn
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LixNxSGzlGA I have a five string kantele on my lap just for that

>>54048818
>>Black pudding comes out of it
>>Literal retard at the table decides to actually drag away the two female party members
Huh?

>>54048896

There's a literal retard at the table. He's functional, but very very dumb. Rather than fighting the black pudding with us, he has his character grapple and drag away the characters of the two women who play at the table as well, preventing them from aiding in the combat also.

>>54047418
An ogre.

>>54047418
a bored black dragon that gives them a quest to entertain himself, or they can be eaten

>>54048000
>wizard casts a spell on you
>not murdering them with your extra attacks and second wind

>>54048892
>DM only lets me cast if I play an instrument during my turn
Quite possibly the worst house rule I've ever heard. Almost as bad as "act it out" for persuasion checks.

>>54048980

When faced with a persuasion check, both as a player and a DM, I want there to be some effort to, you know, actually say something persuasive. Making a sound statement requires neither actual social grace nor experience, just a modicum of effort.

>>54048955
>Why are you getting mad for, it was just a bit of fun
>It's not like I hurt your character or anything

>>54048892
>Sell instrument
>Buy component pouch
>Never play an instrument again

>>54049020
I've had the opposite experience, bard always rolls incredibly well but doesn't know what to say and as a result fails the check. I'm also not find of sweaty neckbeards acting out cringe worthy intimidation checks.

>>54048913
>playing with a literal retard

>>54048913
I... two grapples on two fellow PCs at the same time sounds difficult, did the retard's PC also have retard strength?
Also,
>Allowing players to do shit to other PCs even though they don't want to
Fuck you Dave, this is a team game, don't be a dickbag. I don't care if you think you're saving everyone.

ROLLING FOR DUBS FOR MAPLE'S LUGGAGE
LET'S GOOOOOOOOO

>>54049129

It was over the course of 2-3 rounds, not both grappled at the same time. He's a barb, so yeah, retard strength is there. As for allowing it, I'm a player in that game, not the DM.

>>54049083

Not my call really, he's friends with the DM.

SQUAD UP
Q
U
A
D

U
P

>>54049167
IT'S YA BOY DAN GHEESLING

Do this see balance? This is for a PC

Projectile Break
Starting at 7th level, as an action you can spend 1 ki point to enter a defensive stance,until your next turn you can use your reaction to make an opportunity attack against a not-magical range attack which is not directed at you.
You hurl a sphere of force energy at a creature that you can see within 60ft of you. Make a ranged spell attack against the target, If the attack hits, the creature takes 1d4 force damage and he drop the ammunition/throwable weapon to the ground.

When you reach 13th level, you can spend an additional 2 ki point to make the ammunition exploit. Each creature in a 10-foot radius must make a Dexterity saving throw. A target takes 2d6 force damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one.

>>54049206
Explode.

>action + reaction + resource
too expensive
>non magical ranged attack
just say ranged attack. it should work for magical ammunition, and specifying ranged attacks automatically omits spells
>can't be used against something targetting you
why?

Starting at 7th level you may forgo one of your attacks to take in your surroundings. Until your next turn you may spend 1 Ki point and use your reaction to interrupt a ranged attack.

Make a ranged spell attack against a creature within 60 feet of you to hurl a sphere of Force at the creature. On a successful attack the creature takes 1d4 Force Damage and they drop a piece of ammunition or a thrown weapon they are holding.

When you reach 13th level you may spend an additional ki point to cause the ammunition to explode. Each creature in a 10 feet radius must make a dexterity saving throw. Targets take 2d6 Force Damage on a failed save or half as much damage on a successful save.

>>54047418
Myconids and Vegepygmies.

>>54047745
I usually go with having two different paths.
For example on a hit mission to kill some count (who was supporting their countries enemies) they managed to kill him but everyone but the monk got beaten down as they all ran away (my players arent tactical) i didnt want to tpk so i decided the counts son, a little kid, wanted to know who they were.
In the dungeon there were two ways out, a fight through the whole castle and a secret door that lead through a cave system.

>>54048818
>Monster appears
>'Hey, you know, maybe we don't have to fight it?'
>Prevents people from starting fight
>Literal retard charges up at it and some others join in and they start wasting their resources on a fucking blob
I wish I could grapple the entire team at once

>>54049449

That's fucking stupid. You don't run when you have a massive advantage.

>I'm gonna be a contrarian

Stop being fucking retarded.

>>54049470
>You don't run when you have a massive advantage
>Party stops to attack every single tree they sees
>WE HAVE THE ADVANTAGE THE TREE CAN'T STOP US

I'm not being contrarian, I'm pointing out that the poster gave no evidence that the person was being retarded when it's possible the poster could in fact be the retard.

>>54049502

I am the poster, and yes, tying up a full half the party's combatants and getting a party member killed for no reason is fucking retarded, and I don't give two shits about how much you want to be a "leet debater," you can fight trees like a fucking nitpicky little bitch all you want, but that's not going to change the fact that had my entire party fought the thing, it'd have been dead in half the time it took just three of us to kill it.

And, just as a kicker, we couldn't have parleyed with the fucking black pudding.

DM starting a new 5E campaign here. I have experience with mostly pathfinder/13th Age 4E

My players really want to be able to use unearthed arcana stuff. What should I keep an eye out for?

>>54049384
>why?
Because balance, otherwise it become a no fly zone for a turn, at least they can hit me if they know the trick

>too expensive
I try to make it expensive because I am exchanging resources, if I can destroy a lighting arrow or a siege ammunition for free that would be too huge

>>54049562
Have you ever considered that you can just... Not fight a monster?
You don't have to discuss terms with the monster. You don't have to feed it. You can just look at the monster, both of you sure the connection of 'yeah, this isn't going to work out well for you' and carry along without needless fighting that might rot your equipment or result in an unlucky crit.

Black pudding has just the barest amount of wisdom that it might be able to think 'yeah, nah', a limited sight range and a slow speed, all of which you can predict a slime creature to have. Probably even throw it a bone or whatever.
The reason a lot of monsters continue to exist is because people don't fight every single thing they see.

Though if you're adding that the player is actually tying up the other players then that's starting to get retarded unless he's using them as bait. Just 'a player dragged off some players away from a fight' alone isn't enough to justify them as a retard.

>>54049627
Don't let them use it if you're not familiar with it. If you're just starting, stick with core rules and do your research in the meantime.

>>54049627
Just don't, some of the stuff is useless, some of the stuff is loremaster.

>>54049656

>Just 'a player dragged off some players away from a fight' alone isn't enough to justify them as a retard.

Yes, it is, when I told you that the rest of us were fighting the damn thing. And hey, all the other bullshit you just typed out to satisfy your own pathetic ego? None of that shit fucking matters, because guess what? The rest of us wanted to fight the fucking thing, INCLUDING the people dragged away. But did you ever stop to think about that? No, of course you fucking didn't, because you're an uptight contrarian sack of shit arguing just to pretend that you're smart.

Why did we want to fight the ooze? It doesn't fucking matter why, we could have wanted to fight it because we think it's fun, or because there are prisoners down the corridor we need to rescue or because we were asked to clear out the fucking cave, but again, you didn't stop to think about that, you just wanted to be a disagreeable piece of shit and it's people like you who are a stain on the fucking hobby, so do me and everyone else a fucking favor and shut the fuck up for once.

>>54049636
It only stops 1 attack from 1 target, not really that powerful. And you have a limited ki pool, so it's not free. Seems like your overbalancing it because you're afraid it's better than it really is.

>>54049759
I'm just saying, you're no different from all those other fucks that come in here complaining about someone doing something they don't like and then everybody berates them for being self-centred and not realizing they're the fucked one.

You come in here, say 'Oh, they're retarded and dragged some people away from a fight'
And that gives almost no ground to justify your constant whining that they're a retard.

>Literal retard at the table decides to actually drag away the two female party members
>Rest of us stay and fight it
Does not imply at all that you were already fighting it at the time.
You have not implied that there was any good reason to fight it.
You have not really explained anything, so I'm completely justified to say 'How do we know you're not the retard?'

If you'd say, 'Oh, we fought it because there was no way around it' or 'This guy is dragging other party members away WHILE we are fighting it' or 'This guy is tying up party members so they can't run' or 'This guy is purposefully trying to fuck us over' or whatever, then yes, I'd have just agreed and we'd all be happy, but otherwise it's contentious.

Sure, I could have kindly said 'Hey, what did this person do that's wrong?' instead of being a rude fuck, but it's not like you didn't choose to be a rude fuck too, so we're both on the same page here.

>>54049789
That may be the case, then just make the first part a reaction and burn the ki point for the extra damage in the second part

My work schedule changed, and I can only make every other session of our campaign now.
Assessing our options, but I may have to drop out. Been playing with the group for a few years now, I like all the players, I like the DM, I like the plot.
Feels bad, man.

>>54049834

Half the threads I see about people complaining about something or another ends up with scores of chucklefucks like you coming in and trolling the fuck out of them just like you are attempting to do now, because that's a part of /tg/'s backwards and fucked up board culture for some reason.

>You come in here, say 'Oh, they're retarded and dragged some people away from a fight'
And that gives almost no ground to justify your constant whining that they're a retard.

Yes, it does, you moron.

>Does not imply at all that you were already fighting it at the time.

Yes, it does, you fucking moron.

>You have not implied that there was any good reason to fight it.

I didn't, and don't, need to.

>You have not really explained anything, so I'm completely justified to say 'How do we know you're not the retard?'

I explained all that was necessary, and you're not justified in acting like a little bitch just because you thought you could have a little fun by showing everyone how much of an ass you are.

>but otherwise it's contentious.

No, it's not.

>Sure, I could have kindly said 'Hey, what did this person do that's wrong?'

And it'd have been a stupid fucking question.

>instead of being a rude fuck,

No, you are and have been full on rude douchy fuck since you first replied to me.

>but it's not like you didn't choose to be a rude fuck too,

Treat people like you want to be treated, you decided to be a cunt, so I'm gonna be a cunt back. You want me to stop, the fuck off.

>so we're both on the same page here.

We have never been on the same page: I was just making a post about an experience I had in response to a post asked a general question about experiences had and you replied for the sole purpose of attempting to being a "le super troll." Again, fuck off cunt.

File: 5799936+_64e30bfde935bafb1225574aeed77fb7.jpg (41KB, 245x204px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 245x204px

>Yes, it does, you moron.
You gave no indication of their intention and thus they might have been doing something clever for all we reading the post know. There's a problem if you think it's fine.

>I didn't, and don't, need to.
So you just go around fighting random shit and then blame the deaths of party members from it on other people?
Well, fine, but blame yourself instead of others.

>I explained all that was necessary, and you're not justified in acting like a little bitch just because you thought you could have a little fun by showing everyone how much of an ass you are.
I can understand if you hadn't explained all the details and explained it in a later post, but you still haven't even justified why you're fighting the damn thing.


You keep avoiding trying the questions that help justify who the retard from the original post is and focusing on calling me an ass instead and it's making me really start to believe that you're the problem at that table here.

>Treat people like you want to be treated, you decided to be a cunt, so I'm gonna be a cunt back. You want me to stop, the fuck off.
This is why I'm being rude to you. YOU'RE the one that wants me to stop. I don't give a fuck, I just want to hear you admit the truth instead of saying 'Actually he was retarded because you're a retard' saying 'Actually he was retarded because, say, we were already fighting a black pudding at the time'

>>54046818
You know the moxie recovery doesn't count temp hp lost? It's supposed to work out like ki without exactly working like ki. So if it's too tough when it uses moxie defensively, then the thing to change is its defense feature.

I've got a question about how incapacitated the 'incapacitated' status is.

I'm playing a Wizard with Tasha's Hideous Laughter where on a failed save the target falls to the ground (prone) and laughs to the point of being incapacitated (status) and has zero move speed.

Does this mean I can go slap a pair of manacles on them while they're laughing on the next turn without any contest? Are they able to resist at all? If you were a DM in this situation would you require an Athletics check and treat it as a 'grapple' attempt despite the incapacitated status?

>>54050203
I'm pretty sure incapacitated isnt the same as the paralyzed condition so it can still try to get away, I'd prob say the grapple check would be with adv.

Is 5e available to be played in a fun good way online through Skype or something? Want to play with buds that live far away but none of us have done it before and I'm worried it'll be awkward and weird.

>>54050088

>You gave no indication of their intention and thus they might have been doing something clever for all we reading the post know. There's a problem if you think it's fine.

I didn't need to, simply reading the situation, anyone would have known that it was retarded. I didn't say "all of us ran into an incredibly slow trap that one guy heroically dragged some party members away," you dipshit.

>So you just go around fighting random shit and then blame the deaths of party members from it on other people? Well, fine, but blame yourself instead of others.

We fight what we want to, no matter how much you're going to whine and complain about it.

>I can understand if you hadn't explained all the details and explained it in a later post, but you still haven't even justified why you're fighting the damn thing.

It wasn't, and isn't, necessary to do so. Insert your own reason, or make one up, it wouldn't change what happened or give it any more meaning.

>You keep avoiding trying the questions that help justify who the retard from the original post is and focusing on calling me an ass instead and it's making me really start to believe that you're the problem at that table here.

Because the questions are fucking stupid and don't actually contribute anything. Like I said before, we could have fought it because it killed one of the party member's mothers, it doesn't fucking matter. Any fucking reason works. And since any fucking reason works, asking for a reason is just pure autism. And you know, or SHOULD know that any fucking reason works, and that your questions are fucking stupid, which means you're being a dumb cunt just for shits and giggles.

cont.

>>54050088
>>54050379

>This is why I'm being rude to you. YOU'RE the one that wants me to stop. I don't give a fuck, I just want to hear you admit the truth instead of saying 'Actually he was retarded because you're a retard' saying 'Actually he was retarded because, say, we were already fighting a black pudding at the time'

At least you're admitting that you're being a dumb piece of shit just to be an annoying ass.

No matter how much shit you spew, the truth has already been said, so it's clear that you don't want me to "admit the truth," you're just here to satisfy some kind of sado-masochistic fetish of yours.

>>54050203
I had that exact issue last week and our DM ruled that since it couldn't take reactions it also couldn't do ability checks. Since Athletics is the check you need to contest a grapple that was really powerful.

>>54050366
I watch 5e streams that use skype for camera + roll20 for the map, it works fine, just don't know how the windows are setup on the PC to see both, but it's viable.

>>54050420
>>54050379

Holy shit, just fuck already.

>>54050470
I mean in terms of social interaction

>>54050203

Incapacitated means they can't take actions or reactions, but neither is required to oppose a check like that.

I'd rule that the creature is thrashing about in their laughter, so you'd still have to make a regular opposed check.

>>54048234
>I want to do an encounter where a Necromancer manages to summon skeletal hands from their graves that cause difficult terrain and possibly some kind of grab effect.
then just do so. NPCs don't need "spells" to do shit. Just have them do it.

If you're really autistic about it , then >>54048292

File: eagle.jpg (56KB, 783x522px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 783x522px

Thread reminder that a character's Passive Perception acts as a floor. If you roll below it, you still get your passive score as your "roll".

>>54050698
>rolling actively
>get a passive result

If they meant Minimum skill they'd have said so.
Besides, it can't be true because what you're describing is called Reliable Talent.

>>54049931
Check with the party. Ask if you can get a plot that allows for you to leave the party every once and a while, or just offer to take the rear whenever you can't make it. There are ways around it, if you work with people for it.

>>54050698
The thing is, if your passive perception is high enough for you to notice something, you shouldn't be rolling just to begin with

>>54046901
WRONG FIELD FAGGOT

>>54050698
Passive perception is walking down a hallway and noticing a cockroach crawl under a secret door you wouldn't have been looking for otherwise.

Active perception is looking over your shoulder to try and catch a ninja. Rolling poorly means you were looking over the wrong shoulder.

>>54047870
roll 5 1s

>>54050854
Which is why you should gently remind the DM what your Passive score is.

>>54047870

Was pick pocketed of all his coin.
Got knocked out by a Bugbear.
Advocated the murder of sleeping goblins.
Got teleported gods know where while realizing he left all of his possessions gear on the kitchen table.

Such is life as a level 1 Monk.

File: Aether Beast.png (11KB, 435x371px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 435x371px

Alright 5eg, due to the action of a player, he was next in line to be Duke. His wife dies, then he revives her and himself as a lich to rule over said kingdom. Their phylacterys are their wedding rings that release pic related as aether beasts when broken. They also have the fiefs population as undead soilders, even 2 death knights, and some bone wyrms. Would this be a good "final" encounter for the party? What level should a party of 6 go into said encounter. Assume both lichs have lair actions.
I don't intend for the party to fight them right away, but at least have the liches expand their fief in a way that increases their area of influence.

>make paladin
>DM uses wierd chargen rules for stats involving cards.
>draw two cards for strength
>get two fucking 9s
>pick heavy armour master for +1 strength
>play as human with +1 strength
>start with 20 strength

come at me bros

>>54051075

>Using cards

Playing cards? Either way, that's strange.

can you explain that system please?

>>54051114
yeah, I personally hate random stats and prefer point buy. the system we used was take 2 9s, 8s, 7s, 6,s 5s, 4s, and draw two per stat and you can switch two stats once. this makes us over the top in terms of points. although my back up barbarian has a 17 wisdom that will never be used.

File: 1484872112224.jpg (466KB, 1188x1772px) Image search: [Google]

466KB, 1188x1772px

Hey 5e.

Aside from reading the DMG have we gotten any more updates to the planes?
Not just invading-visitors like in Out of the Abyss, actually exploring far off worlds.

Trying to convince my Pathfinder group to switch and doing planar stuff seems to be the only thing to motivate them. So I anxiously await.

>>54051170

Could read through the manual of the planes and just adapt it to whatever system you use. mechanically, the numbers don't matter too much and monsters and whatnot seem pretty easy to convert.

>>54051041
nigga i cant make sense of your notepad there isnt even a multiattack
what does once per round mean? some sort of recharge ability?
why does the ac go from 22 to 25???

>>54051075

It's like rolling for stats, only somehow more retarded.

>>54051075
>>54051282
>hating on rolling for stats

My players loved it. Made the party more interesting. One guy got god stats and made a paladin, the other got terrible except for a 17 so I have him a free +1 to start so he could have a 20. He made a goblin rogue and is stoked

>>54050379
>>54050420
Had to go get something from the store.

>I didn't say "all of us ran into an incredibly slow trap that one guy heroically dragged some party members away," you dipshit.
How you describe it doesn't change the facts. The facts we know are 'Some guy dragged players against their will away from the rest of the party' and 'We fought a black pudding and somebody died when it may have gone better if the others have helped'
It doesn't matter if you describe the other guy as a hero or a retard, it doesn't change the facts presented, because those are simply your bias. You're expected to have bias against them and you didn't even slightly try to justify their actions such as with 'Okay, maybe they were actually trying to help but it ultimately fucked everything up'.


You keep saying 'IT DOESN'T MATTER' when this whole thing could end at any point by simply saying things as they are. Even admitting that what you did was retarded would work. Even admitting that there was no plausible reason for their actions and thus they were retarded is okay.

My very first post over here >>54049449 was obnoxious, yes, but it was designed to bait you to say 'No, he wasn't trying to avoid the fight, he was being retarded'

But no matter what, no matter what, you will just not say 'No, wait, they weren't being retarded' or 'He was being retarded and here's why' or 'He had good intentions but it was ultimately retarded'. That's all I want. Not this constant evasion.

>>54051429
>>54050420
(Continued)
And if you really think you have justified enough why their actions are retarded, describe them in full detail and why it seemed they were doing it with the context anyway. It doesn't even have to be a long description. So far, it still seems highly ambiguous because you haven't really presented any facts, just your personal opinion.

>>54051335

Starting at 20 in your primary stat essentially destroys meaningful progression and takes away meaningful choices at ASI levels and when choosing feats.

But that's my two CAP on the matter. Do what you enjoy.

>>54051429
Can you guys just take this somewhere else? Start your own thread or exchange emails or phone numbers or something.

>>54051221
Black fist is his basic attack......
Ax goes from 22 to 25 because his ability to pump ac (I wrote it right there)
You can use legendary actions any time per round, hence the once per round limit on consume. I get it's not the best layout but would you please stop acting like I've written out some world war two cryptology puzzle

>>54051139
Player draws two cards, adds their values, and has a stat. Repeat 5 more times and you've got an array. I'm assuming they have to go down the line as the value distribution is skewed to higher totals.

>>54051498
>>54051429
Yeah, get a room.

>>54051495
So much this, I've reached level 4 and bumped my Cha to 20, DM isn't allowing feats and now it's a boring feature every 4 levels between my cool features.

>>54051495
hey, my Con and Cha still need work. so its not like there is no progression. plus better equipment and higher proficiency bonuses still give you progression.

Could I DM without reading the DMG? Is it just a bunch of advice, or are there essential rules?

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

1MB, 1920x1080px

>>54051598
In the time spent making that post and waiting for a reply, you could have downloaded the DMG and checked it out yourself.

>>54050698
Yes, let's give everyone +10 to all perception checks ever.

>>54050698
>Hiding shit behind perception in the first place
Why?
Do you think your players have more fun not knowing things?

>>54051591
>not playing with feats
I mean, that's not really an argument for "there's no meaningful progression when you start with a 20" since the DM basically removed 50% of the things that can be used for progression.

>>54051595
You'll also have feats to pick from assuming your DM isn't ass.

>>54051598
Honestly it's not essential at all.
I've heard people say 4e has a better DMG anyway.
A lot of the shit is kinda dumb, too, with NPCs with class levels or shit magic items or 'Variant rule: Using an actual grid and board!' or 'Variant rule: Everybody always has advantage I guess?'

Should charisma skills be usable vs other players? I had a disagreement with the bard, and he just said I want to roll persuasion to make me drop what I think. Of course he rolled stupidly high with his +10 to persuasion, so the DM says I now have agree with them, which just seems silly

>>54051598
Chapter 8 is a must read

File: 1489705280961.jpg (9KB, 253x238px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 253x238px

>>54051335
>Not starting with a 20 in your primary stat is terrible
Rolling for stats fags find new ways to make me angry every day.

>>54046901
the discord has gotten a lot better rick the admin now just bullies you if you make him mad two other mods stone and nice also help him so if you like watching some funny shit and talking about d&d come with us

>>54051789
It's his first time DMing, he noticed some problematic feats (i.e. the combat feats) and decided to not use them, he also doesn't allow multiclassing. The classic first-time DM mistakes, other than that he's a good DM that listens to feedback.

>>54051846
No, it's never ok to steal agency from another player. Social skills and spells should not be allowed to be used by one player on another.

>>54051863
No he had a 20 in his dex and less than 10 in everything but con

I offered him a reroll but he's a hardcore "play it like it lands" player

>>54051904
So, basically, all their dump stats were shit?
So, basically, it wasn't terrible at all?

13 in all stats would be way worse than that on any day of the week.

>>54051806
nope, no feats beyond the one at char-gen.
:<

>>54051659
I have fun hiding things and hoping that my players have the sense to look for it. Clues, money, magic equipment. Can they get by without it. Yes. Would it help if they look for it and roll well. Yes. That's what DnD is. Smart decision plus good roll = reward

>>54051950
>Hey let's nerf fighter
Show up naked next session with a sword and tell him to fuck off for trying to nerf barbarians and fighters.

>>54051985
>Smart decision plus good roll = reward
I'm in the 'Smart decision = reward' group.
Rolls merely help you, aren't required but definitely help.

>>54049931
I'm DMing for a player in this situation in a new campaign.

I told him to take a race from one of those planeshift articles and have his character be a planeswalker that comes and goes based on his own whims. His level is determined by how much mana he can gather as he planeswalks in, explaining why he happens to be the exact same level as the party every time he appears.

He just has to not let on that he's a planeswalker.

>>54051872
He should have just pruned the stupid ones, though he does get a pass for it being his first time.

>>54051933
Stay salty mi amigo

I let the group choose at session zero and everyone was on board with rolling for stats
I understand you're used to not actually playing the game and strictly come to these threads to argue about ideal builds but I try to have fun

>>54051872

Tell him (or direct him to this post) that allowing those feats allow him in turn to practice overcoming power builds. Fitting features from the game out of fear deprives him of opportunities to not only challenge others but also himself.

In the case of combat feats, it is a two way win. Players get to play their desired builds, GMs get to set up more epic scenes and throw more.mooks at the party.

Only faggots are afraid of feats.

>>54052099

Cutting*. Fucking autocorrect

>>54051986
our fighter is probably going to dump it all into Con anyway. plus the GM said that we probably wont play beyond 10th level, 12 at the absolute maximum.

although I DO have an actual greatsword at home, that IS an option.

>>54052088
>strictly come to these threads to argue about ideal builds

You do realize rolling for stats is actually better for metagamers than point buy, right?

Other than that if the players really want to roll for stats and you're sure they're not lying to themselves then sure, roll for stats. But it's a sacred cow from back when rolling for stats actually made sense and isn't designed for 5e.

>>54052082
>>54052099
Oh, forgot to mention we're playing a module (HotDQ), so we're probably stopping at 7-8th level, and might not continue in RoT, and if we do we may change/make new characters then. By then I'll try convince him to allow feats and MC.

>>54052000
I respect that but players love rolling dice so I'm here to help satisfy them.

>>54052187
I guess. The main concern here is aside from making perception far too valuable a skill it may just encourage 'I search for traps' on fucking everything.

I want to present players with the puzzle of 'how do we handle this trap?' rather than 'Is there a trap?' and they can roll to fuck with the trap rather than know there's a trap at all.

Random question because /4eg/ is down: are there any aspects of 4e, fluff or crunch, that you miss in 5e?

I miss a gish who can actually blend martial & magical skill in a way that both feel important. Why even make the Bladesinger if you're not going to let me magically duplicate myself into nine independently-fighting copies, or stab a guy in the guts, kick 'im off my sword and then detonate the fireball I just planted inside him with my sword when he staggers into his buddies?

I miss having a barbarian so metal that when when he cries to the heavens, the heavens answer with lightning - and when he roars, he bowls the enemy over.

I miss... way too much of the fluff to cover here. The cosmology, catastrophic dragons, gnomes, formorians, gnolls... lot of good stuff that got lost because it wasn't traditional D&D.

File: Bigby's Hand.jpg (150KB, 1024x1448px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 1024x1448px

Is arcane hand/Bigby's Hand affected by AOE or saving throw based effects?

>>54052259
Skill challenges. Don't know why they didn't put them in the DMG

What's an appropriate DC to spot a pressure plate disguised as a floor tile? How might the character catch on?

>>54052215
My question to you is: If I was a player and i made a rogue with expertise in perception and investigation and made my wisdom and intelligence my best stats because I wanted to be a detective would you then change your opinion and allow for rolls that let me add my plus +9 to them. As a player I'd feel cheated knowing I made a character who is supposed to be good at "thing" but your rules makes everyone good at "thing"

>>54052151
>ancient d&d traditions have no place in d&d

Hmmmmmmmm really activated my almonds

>>54052349
15 or 20.

If they make the perception roll, they notice that the tile is not mortared.

File: thonkang.png (8KB, 90x88px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 90x88px

>>54052259
>random question
>literally a copy/paste of a post from last thread
Why don't you just make a /4eg/ then?

>>54052375
"Ancient" D&D worked A LOT different

Did the Amonkhet art book get a planeshift article like the past couple ones did?

File: look at this phb.png (2MB, 1060x810px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1060x810px

>>54052151
>Other than that if the players really want to roll for stats and you're sure they're not lying to themselves then sure, roll for stats. But it's a sacred cow from back when rolling for stats actually made sense and isn't designed for 5e.
Rolling for stats is *literally* the default rule in 5e. Array is a default alternative, and point buy is a DM-locked variant. The system is designed to be flexible enough to handle rolled stats. Don't fall for or propagate /tg/ memes.

>>54052468
Are /5eg/ers really the autists and retards?

>>54052430
They try, but no one goes to them to do anything but argue about why it was good/shit/meh/not DnD. It's sad.

>>54052508
>are [regular 4chan visitors] really the autists and retards?

You tell me

>>54052456
Not yet it hasn't, and we don't know if it's coming or not. WoTC is keeping that close to their chest.

>>54052554
5eg seems to be worse place, with the 5egers on here having retardedly autistic and overbearing ideas on what is allowed and what is d&d.

>>54052611
a* worse place.

>>54052554
Nah, we still shit on people that think fumble tables are fun.

>>54052430
>Why don't you just make a /4eg/
because ded gaem

>>54052468
If anyone uses the term sacred cow unironically in an argument against rolling for stats, then they've lost. The only thing that people can really say is bad a out it is that it has the potential to lead to a sizable power difference between players. They'll always use the "someone shows up with four 18s" and "waaaahh DM pls lemme reroll I didn't get the stats I want" as if they're actually reasons for not rolling, when in reality they're just points against the DM.

File: Enough is enough.png (768KB, 586x795px) Image search: [Google]

768KB, 586x795px

>Play 5e
>Co-player is constantly complaining about low power level of the edition
>And bounded accuracy, especially bounded accuracy
>"It's silly for a goblin to be able to hit a level 10 fighter".
>Bring up Tucker's kobolds. He does know that 3.PF edition is the only edition of DnD that has superheroes in it, right?
>"Well, Gygax is a moron, he just didn't understand anything."
>mfw

File: Ninian.jpg (60KB, 704x866px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 704x866px

so currently designing an NPC to act as party support who will much later be revealed to be a young metalic dragon posing as a human.

kind of want her to be not stock metalic but making her platinum or adamantine feels too "oh look how special she is" although i do want her to be a little special. what do?

also basing her off Ninian from Fire Emblem but more cheerful and good at banter.

>>54052697
>DMPC
>A dragon in disguise
>That you want to make super special
>Based on some weebshit
hekaton.jpg

File: King Hekaton.png (86KB, 171x189px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 171x189px

>>54052697
Stop.

Mike Mearls really is the fun DM.

https://mobile.twitter.com/mikemearls/status/877293393876983808

>>54052697
Have her be stock metallic. It's already bad enough as is, so I suggest making her at least a little less snowflakey. Consider making her a dude.

>>54052697
>>54052833
But she's going to get all the dickings.

>>54052697
When I want to talk to my players in character all the time, I just make a sentient item.

You don't need an entity that follows all the rules of a PC that acts as one to RP with your players.

>party starts a war and pisses off a dragon in one session at level 2
Serves me right for preparing multiple sessions in advance I guess

>>54052857
Why would being a dude stop that? I'm not saying change the appearance, just the genitalia.

>>54052833
Silver it is!
>>54052894
in mechanical terms i want an escort quest where the person of interest is useful.

File: the_thinking_man_by_jonc20-d2y3jlh.jpg (158KB, 821x973px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 821x973px

>>54052468
>Default Rule
>Not used in League Play

Hmm.

>>54052922
Sentient magic item that regains good-aligned powers when taken to a certain place, but gets evil-aligned powers if taken to a different place.

PCs know this, and some group of bad guys know this.

The sentient item still has a few powers the PCs can draw on.

>>54052927
Adventurers League also allows you to spend downtime and money to level up, and go from PotA to SKT with legendary elemental weapons at 5th level with no way for the DM to say no.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (169KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 1280x720px

>>54052815
>Not Earth, Wind & Fire

Well, my disco themed Oath of the Ancients Paladin isn't a total redo.

>>54052954
actually as one of the starting perks i gave one of the players a magic item and he requested it be sentient, so there is that.

the purpose of this character is to introduce a plot element of dragons returning to this plane and establish a villain for later (a green dragon).

>>54052697
>Bringing in a named bronze dragon to interact with the party, maybe help for a tough fight or two
>It's a guy
Don't steal the spotlight from the players, and don't try to make her overly special.

>>54052927
>You can't play chicken people, make NE/CE characters, can't copy spells during adventures, you can pay the local church to raise dead your player, DM has no say on multiclassing or feats.

Your point?

>>54053001
Answer those two questions, and answer them honestly. Why do you want this character to be an extremely attractive woman? Second, why wasn't a simple metallic dragon enough for you, and why did you feel the need to make her some special breed?

>>54053001
Then have the item be dragon-related and have knowledge of dragons instead of putting your DMPC waifu in

File: Chromie.jpg (45KB, 256x387px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 256x387px

>>54052697
Just make her an NPC that guides players around, nothing more.

Pic related.

>>54053031
I think those are your points, buddy.

>>54052927
AL is only for those who no group wants to play with, and the League itself is a waste of space.

>>54053012
she's trapped in human form because the green dragon stole the item that lets her transform back. in combat she runs buffs for the party who will have control over her actions after the first encounter with her.

>>54053053
1 got over the idea of making her anything either than a silver dragon

2 I spent hours trying to find a picture that was not shittliy drawn for a young woman with white hair, blue eyes and not an elf. settled on this one cause i liked it and wasnt AS over the top super model as other choices were.

seriously though, try looking up d&d portaits on google images or pintrest and find plain looking women, its not very common. but if you know of a place please post the link.

>>54052364
If you're a rogue, you've plenty of times to investigate or perceive for traps mid-combat or while running. It's just that there's no unnecessary faff outside of combat, where you didn't need high perception to check for traps anyway, just enough time.

High passive perception = Better initial detail on rooms.

Passive perception = int+wis, so that everybody and their mothers don't take perception instead of something more flavourful.

And also there's custom feats at level 1 if you don't feel investigatorey enough. Give yourself an ability like 'you can tell whether an attack is resisted or immune or vulnerability or etc'.

I tend to consider things often by proficiency/expertise. 'If you have proficiency, this is easy enough that you've no issue doing it' or 'if you have expertise, you really don't need to roll to do this, it's so simple to you' but I guess the flaw of all this is you don't get to add your shiney +9 or whatever modifier as often.

For example, I told a player with acrobatics expertise earlier, 'You're so good at this I'm not going to even ask you to roll to land safely on that thing over there. There isn't any feasible way you deserve to fail.'

>>54052468
It's the default rule because yadda yadda sacred cows.
Just because something is in the book doesn't mean it's good.

>>54052644
The game is fucking designed around point buy. A monk can literally lose AC below what even a peasant with the same dexterity would have from having negative wisdom. You can die in character creation from low con. The game assumes you won't have less than 8 and the balance assumes you don't have a player with 20 strength and another with 12 strength because that player with 20 strength could actually end up doing twice the damage of the 12 strength player.

If you look at older games, you'll see that rolling for stats has a proper impact - races/classes etc are locked for certain stats and a high stat only gives you a minor bonus, but in 5e it causes much more party imbalance.

>>54052697
>Shapeshifting mary sue dragons
Here we go again
>I'm big and powerful and that means I don't deserve to have flaws like being big and powerful and instead I can just be a tiny person like everybody else and be like everybody else except I'm super special because I'm actually a dragon. Also once I get older I can permanently stop time and kick all the gods in the face repeatedly while laughing because they probably don't have time stop immunity.

Your best bet is to not do it at all.

File: 8c3.jpg (43KB, 640x496px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 640x496px

>>54053186
>High passive perception = Better initial detail on rooms.
Show me a DM that does this, and I'll show you someone who wastes their time.

>Passive perception = int+wis, so that everybody and their mothers don't take perception instead of something more flavourful.
What. Why.

>Give yourself an ability like 'you can tell whether an attack is resisted or immune or vulnerability or etc'.
You don't just tell people this? Like, "They shrug off the fire attack."

>I tend to consider things often by proficiency/expertise
I hope you don't do this for too many things. Stuff like stealth, contests (esp. grapples), and trap disarming can always use rolling.

>I'm not going to even ask you to roll to land safely on that thing over there. There isn't any feasible way you deserve to fail.
This is fine.

>>54053263
plan on having her die later on so the PCs have more reason to go after the main villain.

silver dragons DO have shapeshifting, her flaw is she cant do anything really impressive, character flaw being wanderlust and a bit of klepto (gotta grow that horde after all).

though i have not expressly written it down, I do keep in mind character flaws and character weakness when making NPCs

>>54053306
>Show me a DM that does this, and I'll show you someone who wastes their time.
I do waste my time, thank you very much, but I have the time to waste. If you play an investigator character and don't use the extra information then why are you playing an investigator character?
I'm not saying other DMs should run things how I do it, though.

>What. Why.
Wisdom is wisdom so obviously it applies, intellect is to say 'Oh, that sound I picked up with my wisdom is this.'
It's not 100% fitting but I say it works out fine to encourage a reason to get higher intellect when there really isn't much of one in the first place.
It also puts less value in literally every bard and rogue getting expertise in perception.

>You don't just tell people this? Like, "They shrug off the fire attack."
I do, but somehow people still don't seem to get the fucking idea. And sometimes it's, say, a 1 damage firebolt, how are they supposed to know that I wasn't just describing 1 damage? How are they supposed to know I wasn't just describing 'they're really fuckin' tough'?
If you don't like that example, you can come up with whatever the fuck you want as long as in the end it doesn't break anything.

>I hope you don't do this for too many things. Stuff like stealth, contests (esp. grapples), and trap disarming can always use rolling.
The idea is things like 'You can't play the lute very well without having lute proficiency or background mention, unless you're, what, a bard?'

>>54047646

As a DM I only let other players go on Perception Check Parades if they can tell me what they do differently from the previous players.

Like, no, the whole party can't just say they make a Perception check on the room. One guy can give it a grand sweep, another can focus more on one side, another can be looking for something in particular...

Of course, once it gets exceedingly specific, they turn into Investigation checks, and then same rules apply. People can make the same check, just not in the same way, unless they have a valid and diagetic reason not to trust the other players' results.

>>54053418
>>54053306
(Cont)

>I hope you don't do this for too many things. Stuff like stealth, contests (esp. grapples), and trap disarming can always use rolling.
The idea is things like 'You can't play the lute very well without having lute proficiency or background mention, unless you're, what, a bard?'
Also, if it's something dead simple such as disarming a common trap and you have thieves' tools expertise then I'd simply assume you know your way around this sort of shit.
If you want to help someone in history but don't have history proficiency (or at least very high intellect) then tough luck.
Of course if you don't have athletics proficiency but want to help someone jump with 'I'll do this in order to help them: I'll put a tenser's floating disk for them to jump off of part way' and it's valid then sure though in that case that wouldn't be advantage but some other benefit.

>>54048778

By providing moral support and general confidence.

>>54053452
Oh, right
I think the best example I should've given was
'There's an semi-magical item that you can use to bandage someone up but you need medicine proficiency to use it'.
Sure, you can try without proficiency, but you might fuck it up and waste it.

>>54048980

I don't demand players act it out just to make a check, but to encourage inventive roleplay, acting out a sound and convincing argument that would be in line with what the character would come up with grants a point of inspiration, which they could use on that particular check, if they wanted to.

Trying to homebrew for the first time. hows this for a level 3 party
Smouldering Obsidian Knife

Radiate Fire. You can use a bonus action to speak the command word. When you do so, the knife begins to emit a scorching heat, each creature in a 5-foot-radius sphere centered on the knife must make a DC 13 Dexterity saving throw. A creature takes 2d6 Fire damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one. You can use Radiate Fire once per day.

What changes should I make to it to balance it.

>>54053609
Inspired by Berserk?

>>54053609
why a knife?

>>54053621
No, never seen it
>>54053629
toss dagger, yell word. get throwing damage and fire damage.

>>54052697

And I thought I was bad for making the suspiciously long-lived but beloved mayor of my mountain town a disguised silver dragon whose horde is a collection of friendships.

File: young-smiling-man-in-kitchen-holding-coffee-cup.jpg (43KB, 432x673px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 432x673px

>>54053609
>Burns the one that wields it.

Nothing. Change nothing.

>>54053352
It's fine, you can go ahead and do it, but

I personally just really hate the whole shapeshifting dragons thing.
It's my belief that big and powerful creatures must face the consequences of being big and powerful rather than being able to brush it off with magic. A god can't appear on earth and control their magic to a degree where it won't fucking burn people in their radiant light, for example. Unless they're pretty much built around it.

Just got around to watching the new samuri jacks
Would fighter 4 / Bard x be a good multiclass to be aku's favorite assassin?
I want to use disarming attack and then action surge to cast shatter on whatever boss im fighting
Pick up spiritual weapon and conjure elemental as my magical secrets

Theater of mind > gridfaggotry

>>54053655
That's just cute if it's not a DMPC that follows the party around with no restrictions on how it acts.

>>54053708
>Rolling to see how many goblins the fireball even hits

No.

>>54049024
It is roleplaying faggot. You aren't mad, your character is mad. Imagine for a minute that in real life if some wizard you were travelling with was casting a spell on YOUR BRAIN to toy with you all the time. Would you let that shit fly?

Unless your character is a retarded minion, he probably would not tolerate that. In character, you need to explain to his character that you won't put up with someone toying with his mind and if he doesn't stop you will be forced to raise your sword against him.

>>54053708
Personally I'd say that if you have 2 or less enemies then don't roll initiative and don't use a grid unless there's environmental importance.
Otherwise, use a fucking grid.

>>54053228
>A monk can literally lose AC below what even a peasant with the same dexterity would have from having negative wisdom.
Yeah, and a Fighter probably wouldn't be able to hit that peasant if he had 6 STR. Protip: don't put your lowest roll into one of your main stats. It goes without saying, but your examples are so retarded I don't wanna take the chance and am assuming you are too.

>You can die in character creation from low con.
How. Least you can get is 4 HP if you're a 6 CON Wizard. Which is about as retarded a decision to make as it was for you to post in this thread.

>differences in player power
If you refer to the previous post you quoted, that's a risk that people have to be willing to take when rolling. You accept that there's a huge variable at play, and that you'll be stuck with it for a while. If your players don't want to risk it, then point buy.

I'm not saying you should only roll stats and never point buy, as there are obviously situations where one is more preferable than the other, but holy shit just stop posting your opinion as if it were fact.

>>54051868
Wrong. We tolerate it because OP puts it in there. We don't talk about it, or the fags that go there. Just shut up about it.

>>54053822
isnt the base rule from the old editions that you roll each stat sequentially and have to keep each roll for each stat. cause that shit is dumb

So whats wrong with the discord?

>
Yeah, and a Fighter probably wouldn't be able to hit that peasant if he had 6 STR. Protip: don't put your lowest roll into one of your main stats. It goes without saying, but your examples are so retarded I don't wanna take the chance and am assuming you are too.
It's possible with rolled stats to be forced to have less than 10 in your main stat.

You've missed the point: A peasant with 8 dex and 8 wis has 9 AC. A monk with 8 dex and 8 wis has 8 AC. The monk has an ability that actually loses them AC if they have shit stats.
A monk depends so heavily on their stats that starting with higher or lower stats affects them more than anyone else. And that's kinda fine when you're on point buy and you can do whatever, but not by rolled stats where they actually want you to roll stats after you've picked your class given the order they suggest it.

>How.
Rolled health exists.
There is no minimum health gained.

>If your players don't want to risk it, then point buy.
True, but what if one of your players wants point buy and hates being not-equal and the others take rolled stats?
Let them both do their own thing? But then the point buy player may well have lower stats than the ones who rolled or even higher stats depending and they won't be happy with it. What did the rolled stats players get? A momentary happiness from gambling?

>but holy shit just stop posting your opinion as if it were fact.
But it is fact, as supported by 5e's design.

>>54053888
What is the point of a discord when this thread is up 24/7 and you can ask anything you want here?

>>54053866
I don't know, I don't remember if they had specific rules like that.

3d6 down the line is brutal, to be sure. I go one of two ways: 3d6 assign where you want, or 4d6-1 down the line. First one gives you a modicum of control over good and bad rolls, and the second trades off control of stat distribution for higher roll potential.

>>54052697
Everything about this is the worst idea.

>>54053904
>There is no minimum health gained.
>But it is fact, as supported by 5e's design.

5e gives you minimum health based on your class. Not sure what you are on about.

>>54053904
>rolled health
I'm pretty sure you get the maximum on your first hit die.

>>54053904
>There is no minimum health gained.
You should probably re-read how hit points are assigned at level 1, and the minimum at each level thereafter.

>>54054018
>>54054008
>>54054007
Character creation =/= character must be level 1, friendos.

>>54048892
Bring a kazoo instead, that'll shut him sown.

>>54053704
I meant to say fighter 6 / Bard x

>>54053717

He keeps a hoard of treasure at the top of the tallest mountain in the region, with the intent of giving it all to the townspeople who have loved him so much when he dies. He's an ancient dragon, so it's on the agenda. He keeps his identity a secret because being able to mingle among the people, as a normal human, to experience their joys and sorrows and everyday pleasures, is the greatest treasure of all.

However, an envious cloud giant is after the treasure at the top of the mountain. He knows that he could never steal it from the dragon, but he's not above sowing discontent among the townspeople to turn them against their beloved mayor. His plot is to accuse the mayor of being a vampire. Pale, long-lived, and occasionally disappears with flimsy explanations as to why? It stinks of vampirism, and the dragon knows this, but knows revealing the real truth would mean giving up his "humanity."

>>54053904
>A peasant with 8 dex and 8 wis has 9 AC. A monk with 8 dex and 8 wis has 8 AC
A monk can use 10+dex instead if they want to

>>54054037
The character still had to be level 1 at some point in his/her past and would still at minimum have started with the max from his/her hit die, per the rulebook. Not sure what logic or rationale you are applying to evade that simple fact.

>>54053946
worse than FATAL?
worse than Exalted 3rd edition?
WORSE THAN AGE OF SIGMAR??

:(

>>54053904
>A monk depends so heavily on their stats that starting with higher or lower stats affects them more than anyone else
Then don't put your lowest stats in the two most important slots. I fail to see how this is an issue, as anyone who does that is either brain-damaged or trying to kill off their character from the get-go.

>Rolled health
Not at first level, which is where any character creation starts. And again, that's someone willfully putting a 6 into an extremely important stat. Yes, you can die during level-up at level 5, assuming you rolled a 1 each time and made an effort to get there.

>players wanting different chargen methods
If you're the DM, it's your job to establish the kind of game you're running. Players have expectations but won't leave the game because they can't roll for stats/cant point buy. If you're a player, it's your job to collaborate with the other players and have an enjoyable time. If that means giving up on the ability to roll your stats because everyone wants to point buy, then it's on you to either accept it or find a group that wants to roll.

>my opinion is fact
Source pls. I'll concede if you give me proper proof.

>>54054095
Don't make up rules.
"Beginning at 1st leveI, while you are wearing no armor
and not wielding a shield, your AC equals 10 + your
Dexterity modifier + your Wisdom modifier."
Where does it say you can choose?

>>54054102
>Okay gang, make characters starting at level 5
>Wizard with 3 con
>-4 con mod
>Starts with 2 HP
>Rolls for health
>Rolls 1(-4 con mod)
>Now has -1 HP at level 2
>Just fucking dies before you've even finished making the character

There's no rules for minimum HP gained per level because normally your lowest stat only goes down to 8 from point buy which isn't enough to potentially give you negative health.

All of my NPC's end up being sarcastic and snarky, or flat. How do fix this?

>>54054037
They would still get the max from their hit die before adding more rolls.

>>54054124
Worse than
Fucking
Freeform
Forum
RP.

>>54054124
It's ok anon, just make the character a she-dude and have the players choke on trap dick when they try to bang. There's a bunch more worse OC on the internet.

>>54054160
Take your medicine well before before GM'ing.

>>54054176
Worse and more devoid of significant content than your sex life?

>>54054151
Then don't put the 3 in con. It's like you're trying to white-room your way into a passable argument.

>>54054160
Don't job as GM, do if you you feel like it.

>>54054151
https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/rules-answers-january-2016
>If you have access to more than one, you pick which one to use

>>54054149
>Source pls. I'll concede if you give me proper proof.
The PHB is the source. Unfortunately there's no easy thing I can point to, but if you go and learn the PHB through and through you'll realize it's balanced around point buy, not rolled stats.
In particular I'd like to point out monk, which has so, so many things that rely on good stats. I've seen so many hopes and dreams crushed on monk characters that rolled poor stats. D&D is something of a power fantasy and if you don't fulfill your role and the wizard does it better than you, it's not going to be fun for that player. The fighter's supposed to be good at doing damage, yet rolling poor stats makes them suck at that role.
Some classes are incredibly stat-dependent while others are not, and that doesn't seem appropriate for a rolling-for-stats game.
The fact one of fighter's class features is getting higher stats faster yet other classes can get that just by being lucky is still absurd, as I've probably already said. It would be poor game design to tell someone that to be as good as another person their class has lost features in place of ASIs.

When you make 5e and try to balance classes, why would you then arbitrarily unbalance everybody again? The system isn't designed to not be balanced, even if it's not perfectly balanced.

I feel I've missed something important that I forgot but I'll have to come back to that later unless any anons can help me out.

File: baka.jpg (11KB, 260x250px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 260x250px

>>54054151
>Don't make up rules
>Where does it say you can choose?
>http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/rules-answers-january-2016
>These methods—along with any others that give you a formula for calculating your AC—are mutually exclusive; you can benefit from only one at a time. If you have access to more than one, you pick which one to use.

>>54054151
If someone is so unhealthy they have 3 con, they should die be able to die at level 2 due to dumb luck

>>54054220
It is possible to end up with 3s in everything.

This is just an extreme example, but on a lesser level even with -2 con mod you can lose 1 HP, and they haven't got any ruling saying 'you can't lose HP'.

The point here is they didn't write the rules with this in mind because it's assuming people will have stats between 8 and 16.

I think these are kinda minor points in face of issues like how dependent on stats monk is, though.

>>54054331
RAI, yes. Rules as they were written still doesn't take into the account potentially having low stats.

>>54054378
I guess it's kinda fun, though it's a bit of a system error.

>>54054160

Add the following table to your DM screen and use it when you need to think of an NPC's demeanor on the fly.

d10...............Demeanor
_____________________
0...................unctuously polite (total yes-man)
1-2................thoroughly kind-hearted (good Samaritan)
3-6................affable but neutral (pleasant passerby)
7-8................sardonic and unimpressible (sarcastic jerk)
9...................unrepentantly rude (standoffish asshole)

>>54053888
its a cesspool of trannies wanting attention and admins that bully everyone else
theres even a special boys role for people that send the admin nudes

File: Untitled.jpg (51KB, 350x250px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 350x250px

>>54054336
>Unfortunately there's no easy thing I can point to, but if you go and learn the PHB through and through you'll realize it's balanced around point buy, not rolled stats.
So basically you're basing this "Fact" on the fuzzy feeling after reading rather than any explicit statement.

Well, here's an explicit statement in the phb which lists rolling for stats as the first option for obtaining stats. Point buy is explicitly a variant option to rolling, as is standard array. Even if you were to compare them on the same merit it's obvious that Wizards considered rolling just as viable and useful as the other options if they are listed together.

Between what Wizards lists as the first suggestion for rolling ability scores and what you think they said I'm going to go with the explicit listing.

>>54053888
You know how unanonymous forums end up creating a system where some people's words have more weight than others just because of their extended time, or friends?

The Discord went through that, then went through another version of that where it's now weighted by how much you toe the admin line. So it's worse than the average reddit board at this point.

>>54054453
All you've proven is that someone on the writing team didn't understand their own system.

The game mechanics start breaking down in the case of extremely low stats, the game is designed to function within certain parameters and outside of them the wheels start to fall off, and random rolling is the only stat generation method that offers the possibility for this to happen.

>>54054453
You don't need to post that because that very line is what's in dispute.

The idea is that the book is wrong.

Sure, that need some supporting evidence, but I can't point to any one thing.
All I can point to is balance.
You can't deny that point buy is better for game balance, that is hard fact.

So the question from there is 'how much does it matter for balance?'
For a fighter, that could easily mean 50% extra or 50% less damage.
For a monk, that could easily mean over 50% extra or less damage and 50% to 150% survivability.

Yet for a moon druid it affects hardly anything.

So already we've just invented a system of 'why not pick moon druid if you get poor stats?' generated from rolled stats.
This is objectively bad for the game as it forces people away from 'do what you want' to 'if you don't want to suck, do this.' Why even have class options if you're going to bully players around like that?

I'm repeating myself so much, but you can't just wave it away with 'look, it says roll the stats in the book!'

Rolling for stats was a poor decision to put as a non-variant rule because, and here are the points you need to address to defend rolled stats, in summary:
1. It directly affects how well somebody does their class's role, sometimes. Without that, they lose their class identity.
2. It encourages metagaming by class choice based on stats rather than what you want.
3. It affects gameplay far too dramatically for what should be more flavour-focused.

>>54054568
>Says the PHB proves that he's right
>PHB proves that he's wrong
>"the people who wrote the PHB don't know their own system. But I do."
Yeah alright.

>The game mechanics start breaking down in the case of extremely low stats
Wow it's almost as if there are two variant rules that allow you to then get a guaranteed set of stats if you did fall victim to that.

File: mugi we have this thread every day.jpg (37KB, 396x382px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 396x382px

>>54054568
>the rules as written are wrong
>the people who made the game are wrong
>the people who play the game are wrong
>only I am right

File: 1481459866412.png (358KB, 500x352px) Image search: [Google]

358KB, 500x352px

Anyone know if there's been made some errata/good house rules on the Forge clerics's Channel ability?

Personally I assume you must "own" the items offered, but other voices have suggested tuning doors, bars, shackles, locks and other environmental metal objects.

>>54054604
>>54054612
>>54054598
i prefer the 3.5e point buy system.
you CAN have an 18 to start you just have to pay through the nose for it.

>>54054638
Unfortunately the dump stats are too dumpable for that to be reasonable, and it just empowers metagamers, to be honest.

>>54054598
>All I can point to is balance.
Shit isn't balanced. You talk as if there was some end goal of inter-class balance that is subverted entirely by the possibility of randomly low or high stats, but this is a system where some classes are almost entirely suboptimal or severely limited to limited circumstances, depending on the setting. Even with point buy people are going to gravitate more towards paladins and wizards over monks and warlocks.

You are saying your entire argument against the official rules of a system in which you have chosen to partake based entirely on some ideal of balance that doesn't exist in reality the first place.

>>54054672
think you mean power gamers. meta gaming is acting in game on out of game knowledge.

>>54054625
My DM houseruled the ability into uselessness. Not only the material must be the same (never stated in the text), but quality of the material also must be the same. So I can't make armor out of an avil, because anvil is made out of shitty iron or something.

I think one of the things I forgot are the distinct lack of attribute-based locks.
Increasing a stat doesn't give you flavourful access to anything other than needing 13 in a stat for multiclass or some very select feats, all it really does is increase your success rate.
If rolling for stats is supposed to add some fun flavour, why don't the stats affect flavourful things rather than mostly affecting, say, combat?

>>54054698
>The system isn't balanced
It's balanced enough, though it varies by game depending on how the DM does things.
Why make it less balanced for the sake of rolled stats?

>>54054707
Well, pretty much. The word leaks over and it's hard to justify that.

>>54054766
>Why make it less balanced for the sake of rolled stats?
Why block off the chance to get above average stats based on your personal interpretation of what is balanced?
Some players like the risk in a system that statistically favors rolling above average stats, and know that there are two variant rules that can provide them unexceptional but solid stats if the results of the former are so grossly detestable. Hell, if the results are that bad the DM and other players may be conducive to letting you mulligan. Using your own words, it can still be balanced enough depending on how the DM does things.

>>54054868
A non-variant rule shouldn't require heavy tampering with to work properly.
Yet, people tamper with rolled stats constantly like you said, 'if you roll bad stats they might let you do something else'.

And, not to mention, the non-variant rules should be fair on new players.
So how come it's not fair to new players, but empowers more experienced players who know how to compensate for their poor stats?

A player rolls poor stats but says 'I want to be a monk and do cool monk shit!'
Why do you punish this poor new player, or do you have to then houserule them to do better when the system shouldn't be forcing you to make all these houserules because the main rules are defunct?

Rolled stats should be a variant rule, left there for those who want fun taking risks.

>>54054443
>>54054487
now wait for the reply from an admin or a special boy
"oh its just a few salty anons who are underage or have never been here" which is total horseshit

Rolled 6, 4, 4, 2, 3, 2, 5, 5, 3, 2, 4, 2, 5, 5, 5, 3, 6, 5, 1, 4, 4, 1, 3, 1 = 85 (24d6)

>not rolling

>>54054929
>A non-variant rule shouldn't require heavy tampering with to work properly.
"You can do Point-buy" or "you can re-roll" is not "heavy tampering." It is literally repeating processes that are written in the rules arleady.

>And, not to mention, the non-variant rules should be fair on new players.
Standard array also a non-variant rule. They are free to take that if their rolled results are unsatisfactory.
>So how come it's not fair to new players, but empowers more experienced players who know how to compensate for their poor stats?
>Why do you punish this poor new player
You selectively bring up the possibility of being given unusually poor stats that a new player may not know how to compensate for, but ignore the possibility of given unusually good stats that can help compensate for a new player's inexperience (which, given the 4d6 drop lowest system, is what the system statistically favors).

>or do you have to then houserule them to do better when the system shouldn't be forcing you to make all these houserules because the main rules are defunct?
Oh heavens, "you're new to this, this wouldn't be fair for you; you can roll again," what a lengthy, uncalled for usage of rules that are already written out in the fucking game.

>>54055031
>It is literally repeating processes that are written in the rules arleady.
It's making an arbitrary DM-guided decision to fuck with the core character suitability. There's no 'actually wait we shouldn't be using rolled stats for you after all' in point buy. You can't screw up with it.
Rolling low stats and then changing it is realizing that rolled stats has fucked something up and giving up on it, even if only for that one player, or using it over and over until it gives the desired result and going against the point of rolled stats.
The point you said rolled stats was for was for risk, right? So why are you removing that risk again?

>You selectively bring up the possibility of being given unusually poor stats that a new player may not know how to compensate for, but ignore the possibility of given unusually good stats that can help compensate for a new player's inexperience (which, given the 4d6 drop lowest system, is what the system statistically favors).
So it's fine if, say, 25% of new players are screwed over because the other 75% are fine? I don't really think that's a good game design.

>Oh heavens, "you're new to this, this wouldn't be fair for you; you can roll again," what a lengthy, uncalled for usage of rules that are already written out in the fucking game.
Again, what's the fucking point of rolled stats if you just keep going until people have what they want? Why not just point buy, then? Some DMs will just go by the book and not allow that reroll.

>>54055014
STR 14
DEX 13
CON 9
INT 15
WIS 15
CHA 6

Congrats, you are the world's shittiest Cleric. You can walk the walk, but fuck trying to talk the talk, you can't even convert a praying mantis. Otherwise, you're decent, if a bit prone to falling ill. Heft your mace with pride, and continue learning your gospel, because it's working.

>>54055014
14
13
9
15
14
8

This is 2 points short of being possible on Point Buy

Are there any feats a Soul-Knife should take?

>>54055150
Mobile would be useful. Other than that, nothing combat-oriented would really increase their power that much.

>>54055100
>It's making an arbitrary DM-guided decision to fuck with the core character suitability.
So suddenly those ideals of balance and fairness that you were preaching are suddenly "arbitrary?"
>The point you said rolled stats was for was for risk, right?
Who the fuck said that? Quote me. I said that players roll stats because statistically there is a higher chance for reward. There's nothing wrong with mitigating risk, especially when the alternative you're arguing for reduces it to zero.

>Rolling low stats and then changing it is realizing that rolled stats has fucked something up and giving up on it, even if only for that one player, or using it over and over until it gives the desired result and going against the point of rolled stats.
No, it doesn't.

>So it's fine if, say, 25% of new players are screwed over because the other 75% are fine? I don't really think that's a good game design.
If those 25% of new players are given the means to be at least in the middle 50% then sure.

>Again, what's the fucking point of rolled stats if you just keep going until people have what they want?
You don't roll until the player gets what he wants, you roll until the DM believes that it will allow a new player to function. That's what you want, right? To be able to compensate for advantages more experienced players have in stat optimization?

>Why not just point buy, then?
Because it doesn't solve the whole core problem you're trying to fix? A new player with point buy is going to be just as inefficient with the same starting stats as an experienced player.

>Some DMs will just go by the book and not allow that reroll.
And some won't, and some DMs will only let you start with point buy and some will hand you premade characters. If you are trying to set up a system immune to DM discretion you are in the wrong edition of the wrong game.

>>54055106
You know you're allowed to decide which stat each number goes to, right?

>>54055308
There are some versions where it's rolling for down the line stats.

>>54055420
There is only one version in 5e

Rolled 3, 1, 6, 6, 3, 3, 6, 5, 2, 2, 1, 1, 4, 6, 1, 1, 3, 6, 1, 3, 4, 2, 6, 4 = 80 (24d6)

>>54055014
>>54055106

gonna give this a try

>>54055214
I see, I see. Maybe I'll use an Aasimar instead then.
Also, isn't the Mind Meld thing almost totally redundant?

>>54055279
You should only roll stats if you are going to commit to the stats you get.
I've never done rolling but if I did I want my players rolling in front of me with no rerolling. If you get a 5 in a stat then tough luck. The power gamer mentality of rolling for stats bothers me. "4d6 drop the lowest and minimum stat of 8." Or "6 plus 2d6" Sound like people who should just point buy if they want to control the outcome of their stats.

File: 1497270455610.png (21KB, 480x678px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 480x678px

Has anybody rolled a Stone sorcerer/Hexblade warlock multiclass here? Seems like it might be on par with the strength of Palidorc

3d6 down the line is the right way to go

>>54055520
Life isn't all about absolutes, Anon. Gambling is fun but not when you lose your house.

Rolled 3, 5, 3, 1, 4, 4, 6, 1, 3, 3, 3, 6, 3, 5, 1, 4, 5, 2, 1, 4, 3, 3, 4, 6 = 83 (24d6)

>>54055498
Rolling for a Dragonborn Druid, let's see how it goes!

>>54055520
Well, that's your opinion, man. And your right to decide as a DM.

>>54053683
You realize an entire subclass is predicated on the ability of dragons to assume humanoid form, right?

Rolled 1, 4, 5, 3, 1, 4, 6, 6, 1, 3, 6, 5, 5, 4, 2, 3, 2, 1 = 62 (18d6)

>>54055563

>>54055580
11
14
12
11
11
13

>>54055498

STR 16
DEX 14
CON 5
INT 11
WIS 12
CHA 16

A half-elf bard with a dehabilitating immune disease that renders him easily exhaustible and fragile, despite his impressive athletic and acrobatic abilities. He burns bright, but not for very long, as they say. He's made a career out of public speaking, travelling from town to town and telling the disabled and diseased peasants that they, too, can still lead an exciting life. But when the over-confident mob of peasants he inspires actually get obliterated by a sudden goblin attack, he realizes that his life is only just now about to get "exciting," and that the time has come to prove just how "capable" he can be.

File: 1497304326643.png (34KB, 152x186px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 152x186px

>>54055629
>10 Strength
>8 Dexterity
>13 Constitution
>14 Intelligence
>11 Wisdom
>6 Charisma

>Some people think this is fun

>>54055498
STR 15
DEX 14
CON 5
INT 11
WIS 12
CHA 14

You always showed great potential as a warrior. It's unfortunate that ever since you were a child, you have been ravaged by illness and injury. While the other noble families have sons and daughters who spent their child years making connections, you spent your time in the infirmary, being treated by the family maid. Whenever the children visited you, however, you were more than fine company. It's a shame you can't be your full potential, but that doesn't mean you can't be a functional ruler.
>>54055580
STR 11
DEX 14
CON 12
INT 12
WIS 11
CHA 13

You never stood out too much among your peers. Decent grades, decent health, decent at everything while everyone else found something special. But you were never bad at anything, either. Always normal. Until you found your calling. The nature, the wild, the untamed lands. You set out at a young age to find the true calling, and you did. But even there, you were just a normal druid. Decent at connecting with nature, but not extraordinary. So to prove you are a stand out, you've gone to adventure.

File: 1495903251410.jpg (36KB, 552x450px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 552x450px

>>54055721
He rolled 3d6, his loss

Rolled 4, 3, 2, 2, 2, 3, 6, 1, 3, 5, 2, 5, 5, 5, 6, 3, 5, 3 = 65 (18d6)

>>54055563
What's the worst that could happen?

File: not mad at all.png (114KB, 378x231px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 378x231px

>>54055763
Fair enough

>>54055787
9, 7, 10, 12, 16, 11
So you're unusually good at one thing and not particularly spectacular at anything else.

Rolled 3, 2, 5, 4, 3, 1, 6, 5, 2, 5, 1, 5, 2, 1, 3, 1, 4, 2 = 55 (18d6)

DOWN THE LINE BOIS

>>54055721
A Wiz with 16 int is good enough

Rolled 2, 2, 4, 3, 5, 1, 1, 4, 4, 6, 4, 1, 2, 1, 5, 5, 6, 1 = 57 (18d6)

>>54055563
egh

>>54055787
STR 9
DEX 7
CON 10
INT 12
WIS 16
CHA 11

A man of the cloth, I see! Quite well trained, as well, even if you are letting your days in the chapel eat away at your once peak physique. Your wild days of youth are gone, but your golden years of eldership are not quite there yet. Maybe in a decade or so you can see a lofty position in the clergy higher ups, but for now, you spend your days as a humble teacher of the new blood, making sure that they know the fine points of your religion. Although who knows, you may be called on for adventure someday soon? Or go on one yourself, to relieve a mid life crisis.

>>54055851
10, 8, 13, 11, 6, 7 You are slightly gifted in one place and not at all in others.

>>54055884
8, 9, 9, 11, 8, 12. You are hopelessly average.

Rolled 1, 2, 4, 2, 3, 2, 4, 1, 3, 4, 1, 3, 2, 3, 1, 2, 4, 4, 1, 1, 2, 2, 1, 2 = 55 (24d4)

4d4 is more balanced imo