Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
[ERROR] No.37191678 [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

No general up.

Quick, I need to spend $25 on Amazon, should I get the 5e DMG or MM?

Already have the PHB, currently just a player. Which book is better?

>> No.37191774

You want the DMG, you can kinda wing the MM

>> No.37191835

>>37191678
Personally, I say the DMG.

The Basic DM PDF has a fair selection of monsters, creatures, and NPCs. Between what's there and mild bullshitting/tweaking/re-equiping, you should be able to coast on that for a good long while.

Not to mention the DMG's rules for monster creation/customization.

>> No.37191864

>>37191678
DMG. The Basic shows you enough to make your own mosnters and convert form prior books.

But there's also a MF link floating around.

>> No.37191867

>>37191678
Given the choice between the two, I'd go with the DMG. You can grab a lot of monster stats from the D&D Encounter modules for free or just pirate the Monster Manual as a PDF. The DMG has a lot of great shit in it.

>> No.37192026

>>37191774
>>37191835
>>37191864
>>37191867
Done! God I hate Amazon, it's like crack.

>> No.37192199

>>37192026
Good choice OP.

>> No.37192849

Hey guys, if Weapon Specialization existed again as a feat, what would you want it to be? Still just a damage bonus, or a collection of minor benefits while using a single weapon? What would you NOT want it to be?

>> No.37192912

Is there any magic item or some other way to augment unarmed attacks?

>> No.37192974

>>37191678
have a christmas
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/cszft3b7x3ypm/Documents

>> No.37192990

>>37192974
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/eh8nkkrmq3dy8/PDFs and some optional but useful PDFs

>> No.37193073

>>37192849
I dislike the idea of introducing weapon specialisation as a flat bonus, half the point of 5e is to get rid of adding and subtracting a million modifiers to every single roll.

>> No.37193660

>>37192849
The extra attack for 1d4 polearm master is gud , it's not Game breaking and you get to roll more, not add more. But it would be hard to fluff for some weapons I guess -although I'd like to see bow as melee extra attack as a feat.

In any case advantage is to much, everything else is too much bookkeeping, so I'd say each time you take the feat go up one damage die for that weapon, max d20

>> No.37193671

>>37192849
Double proficiency for attack rolls and add proficiency to damage with the given weapon type. Given it's investing 2 stat points to get the feat I don't think it's too OP--a bit OP, but not too much.

>> No.37193741

>>37192849
I'm entirely against weapon specialization. It's like handcuffing your character to a piece of equipment. Specialize in something and you're creating a situation where the DM is being an asshole for not giving bad-guys matching gear for you to loot and/or you being a little bitch about not getting your shit. That situation doesn't need to be there and the rules don't need to encourage it.

>> No.37193788

>>37192849

Given the option between math patch feats and non-math patch feats, I would rather not math path feats.

Isn't this the main benefit of bounded accuracy/proficiency scaling the way it does anyway?

>> No.37193872

>>37193671
That would be crazy OP and easily worth a hell of a lot more than a +1 to a stat. Every class that deals with a weapon damage would take it. The highest AC in the game right now is the tarrasque with 25 if I'm not mistaken. Having no other bonuses at all means that you would still have a %40 chance of hitting. That's before you consider advantage, magic items, boons, etc.

>> No.37193986

>>37193671
Advantage all the time is OP,double advantage, ever, is just stupid. Do you even get 5e?

>> No.37194049

Since this thread is here, is it actually worth keeping up a 5e General going all the time?

>> No.37194123

>>37193073
>>37193660
>>37193671
>>37193741
>>37193788

I'm happy with the current weapon specialization feat style. Without the list in front of me, there's:
Defensive Duelist for Finesse
Crossbow Specialist for Crossbows
Sharpshooter for Ranged
Great Weapon Master for Heavy
Shield Expert for Shields
Polearm Master for Polearms
Dual Wielder for TWF
There's even Medium and Heavy Armor Masteries.

There just needs to be one for versatile weapons. There's probably need for a thrown style feat too.

>> No.37194380

>>37193872
Tiamat in the Tyranny of Dragons is AC25 too lol

>> No.37195519

I'm sick and am unable to sleep. Tell me a bedtime story of your currently 5e games.

>> No.37195576

Is 5E hissy about players who want to play a race that's bigger than medium, or is it possible? I know that 4e really doesn't want you to be size Large, so what about this one?

>> No.37195628

>>37195576
You could probably get away with playing one just fine. The only real rule regarding size in core is that you can squeeze through a space one size category smaller but have some penalties to hit/are easier to hit. There are also no (core) rules regarding weapons larger than medium, but for that it'd just be easier to handwave it as doing the same damage anyway so large creatures aren't just a minmaxer's wet dream.

>> No.37195639

>>37195576
You can be large in 4e

For one encounter per day

>> No.37195643

>>37195519
We're having trouble getting everybody together for sessions to start a new campaign, so I rolled up four random stat arrays, made four random characters, and now I'm playing all four of them myself in a dungeon that I'm randomly generating from the DMG as I go along.

I would say something depressing here, but it is actually really good practice for the new system for if we ever get the scheduling unfucked.

>> No.37195696

>>37195628
Sounds good, might pick up 5e along the way somewhere.

>>37195639

>> No.37195754

>>37195696
True, but the point is that if it can work for one encounter per day, it can work permanently, you just need to homebrew it

The rules for it are fairly simple, you can wield large weapons (one die-size large than the medium version), or medium two-handed weapons (not polearms) in one hand, and all medium-sized melee weapons count as throwing weapons for you on top of their other aspects

>> No.37195772

>>37195754
I don't want to play pretend in play pretend game! I actually want to play a large race!

>> No.37195773

>>37195696
I hate these gifs, if the subtitles say "That's not good enough" then why does the gif only contain "That's not"?

>> No.37195789

>>37195772
But there's no large races in 5e either, not yet at least

>> No.37196029

I was invited to play 5e with some friends, but I haven't played since 3.5e. I'm going to be playing monk. I have a question about how breaking up attacks and movement interacts with monk abilities...

1) Can I throw a dagger/spear from range, then move into melee range and use the bonus unarmed attack granted by martial arts? If so, do these attacks have to be against the same enemy?

2) What about using flurry of blows to throw a dagger/spear and then moving into melee range for two unarmed strikes as a bonus action? If yes, do these attacks need to be against the same enemy?

3) With the way of the open hand tradition ability open hand technique, can each attack granted by flurry of blows do a different effect? Like, can I make the first hit make it so the enemy can't take reactions, second hit knocks the enemy prone, and the third hit knocks the enemy 15 feet away?

>> No.37196061

>>37196029
1: Yes, no.
2: Yes, no.
3. Your first attack isn't granted by Flurry of Blows, so it doesn't get the Open Palm bonus, but yes, you can use the attacks to apply different effects.

>> No.37196380

Anyone been running those D&D Adventurer's League modules?(Tyranny in Phlan, etc) What do you think of them?

>> No.37196423 [DELETED] 

This is literally a mega man 2 boss

>> No.37196524

How are you guys homeruling Inspiration, and the rewarding of it?

As a player, It seems that people either forget when they have Inspiration, or are wary of using it, in case they need it later.

So, when I DM, I plan on getting a special set of "Inspiration Dice" (any excuse to buy new dice), and award the dice themselves based on how much I liked whatever the player did. Inspiration expires at the end of the session. The d20, will let them roll for advantage on any roll, the d12 to d4 will let them add that roll to any other; damage, save, whatever.

This way, there's a physical reminder of their Inspiration right in front of the players, and a shiny, different die makes them WANT to use it. What do you think?

>> No.37196647

>>37196524
I'll be using it RAW and I plan on rewarding it often. I want my upcoming campaign to be less combat-centric than ones I've played recently and hope to see inspiration used in that context (and it will be rewarded in the context for good RPing).

>> No.37197043

>>37196524
In my group of 5...
>I award inspiration to two people at the start of every session, based on performance last session
>Giving away your inspiration is allowed
>You are allowed to use Inspiration AFTER seeing your roll but BEFORE hearing the result.

I know the last one can be a little meta-gamey because two-three rounds into an encounter you have a great idea of how much AC each things has, but I think it's a little more fun when you know you're not just wasting the inspiration.

"I use my inspiration! Roll 1 is... natural 20."

>> No.37197070

>>37196380
Yes.

They're okay, if a little bland. Suitable for the roleplay-light style of most FLGS.

I strongly advise you to use your GM's intuition to tweak encounters to ensure there is both a challenge and fair fight. Some of the encounters are quite easy and others are quite hard.

The lengths of each adventure vary wildly, too.

>> No.37197398

>>37196524

I haven't tried it myself, but Inspiration Cards are a thing people have been doing.

>> No.37197445

How should I go about making a decent Belmont-like character?

Preferably using whips and throwing weapons.

>> No.37197521

>>37197445
Ask your DM to houserule your whips to have Versatile (1d10), because they're a martial weapon with reach but terrible damage. There is no build that makes up for the fact that Whips are just staggeringly bad.

If you want a martial finesse weapon, Rapiers have 1d8 instead of 1d4. If you want a martial reach weapon, glaives are 1d10 instead of 1d4 and benefit from polearm master.

>> No.37197537

>>37197521
How can a whip be used two-handed? Which is what I assume Versatile would imply here.

>> No.37197574

>>37197537
Very carefully.

I know that real people have certainly used two whips simultaneously before, so if it helps you get through your realism, ask for it to be 1d6 and light.

It'll still be totally inferior to a Rapier once you get access to Dual Wielder, but at least it will be 2d6 instead of 1d4.

>> No.37197592

>>37197521
I guess I could drop the "Belmont-like" and just try to be a regular hunter of evil creatures. Which I guess would imply on being a paladin? Not really into preparing spells however...

Goddamn I suck at thinking of characters.

I fucking love whips thou, too bad they are 1d4.

>> No.37197883

>>37197592
Ranger, Favored Enemy (Undead). Paladin also works. Both are half-casters.

Or Battlemaster Fighter, and fluff your lunge attacks as whip strikes?

>> No.37197908

Which type of paladins do Half-Elves excel at?

Someone in the last general said it wasn't the polearm kind.

>> No.37197927

>>37197908
Half-Elves make pretty good sword and boards and greatsworders. Basically anything that doesn't really require a feat.

>> No.37197933

>>37197908
They can be fine Polearm Paladins, you just don't get your Polearm Master feat until 4, so Human is the more min-max choice.

We're talking about differences so minute and minimal in terms of gameplay that we would need more information, like if you're doing roll/set assign/PB for stats, to know if it matters.

>> No.37197944

Playing a Barbarian with a great weapon.

People have really been talking about how amazing Great Weapon Master is -- and that +10 damage is tempting -- but how does Savage Attacker hold up? Since I'm using a Maul (1d12) instead of a 2d6 weapon, that could really make a difference in terms of damage.

>> No.37197981

>>37197521
Whip is another one of those weapons that wasn't balanced, but deliberately printed as shit, like the Trident. It should probably be a light, finesse, reach weapon for tactical rogue shenanigans. That would qualify for whip and thrown weapons. If not light, it really should be dealing 1d6 at least. I'd really rather see someone dual wielding whips than someone using a whip in both hands for more power. Just saying.

>> No.37198013

>>37197927
>>37197933
It's all very preliminary. I'm not sure if the DM will want to roll, since he usually rolled in the past with other editions, or if he'll take one of the arrays or the point buy this time.

He said he's definitely using feats, but he hasn't decided on whether Variant Human Special Snowflakes with Starting Feats will be an option for a race (and that kinda makes me happy, because it's cruel to pretend that Feat or No Feat is a legit choice.)

There's a strong chance of rolling attributes, and it's possible that Variant Human won't be a choice.

>> No.37198052

>>37197981
>deliberately printed as shit

If you can believe it, the current version of the whip is actually much stronger than the playtest version, which was identical except for the fact that it had a special version of finesse that does not add your dex bonus to damage rolls. That's right: you get a dex bonus to hit, but nothing at all to attacks. As a 1d4.

I strongly believe there was a time, before the public playtest, that the whip's special let it do something like trip attacks (like the bolas, which were removed so the net could get their watered-down grapple)

>> No.37198071

>>37198013
Then it's not worth worrying about yet. We're talking about a minmaxer's difference, not something that will ruin your campaign.

5e is generally forgiving racially compared to 3.5e. I saw people have a blast with a dragonborn arcane trickster and a half-orc wizard. These are people getting absolutely none of the stats they want.

>> No.37198079

>>37197933
At level 4, the human has +3 str, +1 cha, and polearm master, with 1 bonus skill proficiency. The half-elf has +1 str, +1 con, +2 cha, and polearm master, with fey ancestry, 2 bonus skill proficiencies, darkvision, and free Elvish language. The differences quickly become undetectable.

>> No.37198084

>>37197883
Ranger, Favored Enemy (Undead), Hunter (Horde Breaker, Steel Will, Whirlwind Attack, Evasion) sounds pretty cool.

However, devotion paladins and their Sacred Weapon ability tempt me. I am likely to spend the next few days trying to decide on a character.

Unrelated question, Sharpshooter works for thrown weapons right?

>> No.37198111

>>37198084
>Sharpshooter works for thrown weapons right?
Only if that thrown weapon is also ranged (e.g.: a net)

Daggers need not apply, Darts may

>> No.37198118

>>37198084
Indeed. Crossbow Expert has a feature that works on all ranged attacks too, despite its name.

>> No.37198132

Is there a minumum damage dealt per attack? For instance, what happens if I end up with a Strength score below 8 and I land an unarmed strike?

>> No.37198139

>>37198071
>>37198079
Fair points.

I'll stick to Half-Elf either way, I think. More skills is pretty neat.

>> No.37198158

>>37198132
0 damage, you are a wimp

Don't despair, though. All improvised weapons are 1d4. So in that situation, take off your shirt and attack with it.

>> No.37198172

>>37198158
>Don't despair, though. All improvised weapons are 1d4. So in that situation, take off your shirt and attack with it.
That is so true, funny, and retarded.

>> No.37198194

>>37192849

Weapon Focus/Specialization should never get reintroduced as a feat.

Maybe as a class feature for a new fighter archetype but that's it.

>>37197981

>Whip being a relevant weapon when people are wearing fucking plate armor

>> No.37198227

>>37198172
>>37198158
>shirt
>not belt

Seriously, dorks?

>> No.37198233

>>37198227
I'd rather attack with my earrings.

>> No.37198256

>>37192849
Inspiration, once every short rest, with weapon in question.

>> No.37198276

>>37198158
>>37198158
>All improvised weapons are 1d4. So in that situation, take off your shirt and attack with it.
But I'm not proficient in improvised weapons.

>> No.37198295

>>37198276
Nor are you with unarmed strike unless you're a Monk or Tavern Brawler, in which case you get a 1d4 (or better) anyway

>> No.37198304

>>37198295
Unarmed strike is a simple weapon (somehow) now. You are proficient with it.

>> No.37198492

>>37198172
Obviously a DM won't let you use your shirt as an improvised weapon without damn good justification. Whereas most things that are viable improvised weapons should indeed be a lot more damaging than a fist; that's why people USE broken bottles and baseball bats instead of just punching each other, unless they're really trained in fistfights (Tavern Brawler feat) or martial arts (monk class).

>> No.37198534

>>37198194
What if it's a studded leather whip?

>>37198492
You make it sound like you don't want to see a man take off his sweat-soaked shirt and use it to beat his foes into submission.

>> No.37198572

>>37198534

A studded leather whip would still do absolutely nothing against heavy armor bro

Whips are fine if you are playing a modern game with indiana jones types but pretty much useless in a high fantasy setting.

They definitely should not be doing a big damage dice ever

>> No.37198579

>>37198304
>a simple weapon (somehow)

How complicated are your hands, Anon?

>> No.37198631

>>37198579
Too complicated for Wizards and Sorcerers, and not light enough to use both in one turn.
>Can throw somatic gestures
>Cannot throw punches

>> No.37198634

How should I go about building an open-handed Monk? I'm brand new, level 1, and not too familiar with the system, as far as efficiency goes. You don't get feats at level 1 anymore, right?

>> No.37198679

>>37198634
Only Variant humans get a feat at level 1. Feats are also pretty strong relative to what you might be used to (I really fucking hated 3.5 feats.)

How do you feel about Wood Elves?

>> No.37198691

>>37198634
a level 1 human (variant) monk, with Mobile feat (at level 1 for humans) and the following stats: 10 16 14 10 16 10, give em a quarterstaff and your golden.

>> No.37198718

>>37198691
That's 31 on a point buy though.

>> No.37198727

>>37198679
I'm fine with any race, really. I'm mostly curious about when I should forego stats for feats at later levels and other customization options like that.
>>37198691
Don't think I'm allowed that array.

>> No.37198751

>>37197944
BASE MAUL:
1-12: 8.33%

Average: 7

SAVAGE ATTACKER MAUL
1: 1.4%
2: 2.8%
3: 4.2%
4: 5.6%
5: 6.9%
6: 8.3%
7: 9.7%
8: 11.1%
9: 12.5%
10: 13.9%
11: 15.3%
12: 16.6%

Average damage: 9

This is not a perfect spread. I know my math is wrong because there's about a 10% margin of error on those stats. Ask someone good at math to fix it.

So your options are thus:
Great Weapon Master: -5 hit, +10 damage
Savage Attacker: +2 damage
Stats: +1 hit, +1 damage

>> No.37198771

>>37198718
>>37198727
>these cats forgot about the Variant Human's +1s

It's cool, Anon wasn't very specific about his suggested build.

>> No.37198775

>>37198691
>>37198718
Here's my independent point buy count:
1+9+5+1+9+1
26 points

>> No.37198789

um just use 8 15 14 8 15 8 and add the two +1's from human, bam you're golden

>> No.37198792

>>37198775
Oh wait, my count factored in +1 all

Hm

I think it goes over 27

>> No.37198816

The 5e feats make me sad; I want them all, but I can't have them...

>> No.37198823

>>37198727
>forgo stats on a monk
Never is a perfectly fine option. Go for max dex, wis, and con.

>> No.37198956

Is Shield Master fun? It sounds fun.

What's the best way to build around eventually having it? Just make sure I've got Athletics and the Strength to use it?

>> No.37199290

>>37194049
Yes, I for one come to tg every day primarily for the 5e general. I hvnt been this excited about rpgs in a long time.

>> No.37199608

So what are the bad aspect of 5e? 5e is my favorite system but I can't think of any shortcomings off the top of my head

>> No.37199617

>>37199608
Not a lot to differentiate certain weapons from each other.

>> No.37199649

>>37198956
It's definitely super useful if you have nothing else to spend your bonus actions on. It's basically a free opportunity to knock someone prone, giving all your allies advantage (except the ranged ones).

Yes, all you need in decent Strength (Athletics).

>> No.37199684

Where can I find some good character sheets? There was this auto-fill one I found, and it worked pretty well until I realized that ranged weapons didn't have the finesse option on them.

>> No.37199688

>>37199608

Limited scaling in non-magic things. Yeah, you do a lot more damage but 'Walk a tightrope' is still a concern at 20th level as it is at 1st, if a bit less of one. While magic got flight at 5th level and is teleporting between planes.

>> No.37199722

>>37199608
Some archetypes have crippling issues - Champion "Muh 80 Hits" Fighters, Four Elements "You Only Get One" Monks, and Beast Master "Glass Cannon Pet" Rangers come to mind.

I don't like how the new Attack of Opportunity system works (you have to move entirely out of threat range to get AOO)

Bards picking paladin/ranger spells

Some classes get many fewer archetypes (Barbarian/Bard: 2, Cleric: 8)

1st level is the most dangerous level of the game

Some abilities weren't thought through entirely (e.g.: It's possible to trigger Wild Magic on your first turn of a campaign, cause a fireball, and TPK the entire party after everyone passes their saves)

Ranger only has 6 spells unique to his spell list

As you can see, a few of these are quickly fixed with house rules or kind DMing, whereas others are more complex issues

>> No.37199752

>>37199722

AoO are an annoyance of mine for a different reason.

They don't scale for shit. They are a little intimidating at level 1 but since people scale damage-wise by more attacks rather than better attacks, as you level the single AoO gets less and less intimidating until most monsters can just sort of wander through most peoples without caring too much.

>> No.37199786

>>37199752
That can be somehow fixed by giving more reactions for each extra attack.

>> No.37199806

>>37199752
Don't forget you only get one AoO and everyone gets Spring Attack, so monsters can conga line attack a member of the party if they want with no problems.

>> No.37199817

>>37199752
Well sentinel kinda allows them to scale

>> No.37199846

>>37199806

Yep. One guy eats a less than impressive AoO at best and then that character gets eaten alive.

>>37199817

A feat shouldn't really be required to make something anyone can do be remotely functional. That and it still suffers from >>37199806

Honestly, this feels like it would have worked out ok if they'd gone with 'Get an extra [W] damage' rather than 'An extra attack' (With a Whirlwind attack option people can do).

Would have made magic weapons less wonkey and would have made AoO scale better.

>> No.37199868

>>37199722
To solve the "dangerous level 1" issue I was thinking of giving every character 10 hp more at level 1 and scale down by one the hit die of all classes (d6 becomes d4 and so on).

That AoO is even weirder with the "facing" variant, you can just attack the enemy behind the back every turn and they can do the same, a very weird fight.

>> No.37199884

>>37199846

5e really encourages the group to maintain a solid defensive line and not get too far out in front of the front line tanks.

I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing, NPCs should be able to use wolf pack tactics on overconfident and exposed PCs.

>> No.37199904

>>37199884

Part of the issue there is that it's basically impossible to maintain a formation where everyone can cover everyone. The corners will always be weak and the free spring attack means that the monsters can conga-line that person.

>> No.37199935

>>37199846
I kind of like +1[W] on opportunity attacks. Makes disengaging even more useful and eating an AoO a big deal.

>>37199868
Sounds like Dark Souls backstab fishing

>>37199904
Different anon. Refresher on Spring attack if you don't mind?

>> No.37199982

>>37199904

Polearm Specialist plus controller mage can generally deny a good percentage of the battlefield.

Sword and Board Tank (Cleric or Fighter or Pally) can generally hold up a flank.

Rogues have to use positioning/stealth wisely

On a battlemat I should be relatively easy to keep the archers/mages/rogues somewhat protected unless you have a small group

>> No.37199992

>>37199935

You can move before and after attacking.

Walk up, shiv a guy, walk out (First guy will eat an AoO but the others won't care and unless Sentinel is involved, it won't likely matter too much to the guy who got hit.)

>> No.37200022

>>37199982

Well, he can deny for one attack at least. Then he's kinda out of control.

>> No.37200068

>>37199992

You could just give everyone dex modifiers opportunity attacks as a default feature but I'm afraid it would make dex even more of a god stat.

The other thing would be that you could make it so that a successful opportunity attack stops the opponent's movement so that in general the melee becomes more static with heavies fighting heavies

>> No.37200105

>>37199722
>Ranger only has 6 spells unique to his spell list
Working on a homebrew spell list addition for this. I've already consulted the general for advice on it a couple times before.

>> No.37200128

>>37199992
What about giving free sentinel to everyone to solve this?

>> No.37200142

>>37185326
>>37185418

who is right?

>> No.37200154

>>37200105
I'm waiting for this, you're doing the work of the gods.

>> No.37200156

>>37200142
>replying to posts nearly a day old

Are you seriously catching up on last thread or something?

>> No.37200267

>>37200142
Maybe at higher levels, but early on, low HP is a real killer.

>> No.37200294

When are we going to get another book?

I really want to see more class/archetypes/feats/etc..

>> No.37200304

>>37200142
>>37200142
Tier1: Bard (smite/volley bard might be broken tier at lower levels), Druid (kinda broken moon druid), Wizard, Cleric, Sorcerer
Tier2: Ranger, Paladin, Warlock
Tier3: Fighter, Barbarian, Monk, Rogue

>> No.37200312

>>37200142

Clerics are pretty great to start and end, but their mid tier spells (4-6th level) are complete junk compared to arcane casters.
Level 1-6 clerics: awesome.
Level 7-14 clerics: lagging behind average.
Level 15-20 clerics: back to awesome.

>> No.37200516

>>37200304
Does Arcane Trickster at least get a push up? Even though I just started and shouldn't worry, the character I liked is low tier...

>> No.37200546

>>37200516
Tier lists don't mean anything as long as your party composition is good.

All that list shows is magic.

>> No.37200564

>>37200105
Have you thought of a level 5 spell to let the ranger stab tons of enemies with two weapons for a turn? Something like smite/volley but to go faster and attack more times than a level 20 fighter would, and with fixed damage.

Basically something that makes a 2 weapons ranger feel like a Tempest once in a while.

>> No.37200577

>>37200154
I hope it lives up to your expectations. I'm nearly to the editing/review process now.

9 of 1st level
5 of 2nd level
3 of 3rd level
1 of 4th level
1 of 5th level

Every school of magic is covered.

>> No.37200640

>Establishing tiers this early

For the most part there really isn't a bad class or an overwhelmingly powerful class in the game currently.

Moon Druid is durable as fuck but most of the other over the top builds (bards getting Paladin Smites before Pallys do, etc) will probably get corrected in errata.

In comparison to 3.x/PF tiers all the classes are probably safely in the old tier 2/3 sweet spot.

>> No.37200641

>>37200577
Nice! I believe in you, anon.

>> No.37200668

>>37200564
I do have something like that. It's potentially stronger than volley, but requires positioning.

>> No.37200684

>>37200516
The tiers I posted aren't as bad as 3.5 tiers. There is a slight difference between tier 1 and tier 2 and an even more subtle difference between tier 2 and tier 3. You are not going to be overshadowed for choosing a low tier character. Also I'm not even sure if rogue is tier 3 or 2, rogue is a very solid class with any archetype.

>> No.37200685

anybody have/find/made any good campaign/adventure homebrew/conversions?

the playtest stuff is unbalanced, HotDQ sucks ass, and the starter set only goes to level 5

>> No.37200696

need a name for this badass

>> No.37200707

>>37200696
Cuddles von Mankiller

>> No.37200720

>>37200696
grey scale

>> No.37200762

>>37200696
Kojack

>> No.37200765

>>37200685
It really wouldn't be hard, just take what's there and turn them into their 5E equivalents. BAM.

>> No.37200778

>>37200685
Have you played all the official adventures?

e.g.: Tales Trees Tale, The Courting of Fire, Shadows over the Moonsea, Secrets of Sokoll Keep, Defiance in Phlan, The Scroll Thief, Drums in the Marsh, Dues for the Dead, etc?

>> No.37200780

>>37200696
Grand Admiral Floofy Cuddlebutt

>> No.37200801

>>37200685

The problem with converting T1-4 to 5e is that in general the actual temple of elemental evil kinda sucks.

T1 is fun but the remainder is full of weak sauce.

A1-4 might be something worth converting but honestly I'd look at Against the Cult of the Reptile God.

>> No.37200803

Oh, 4chan's back. So for AoOs, I was thinking of making this a general mechanical update.

On a successful AoO, add one additional weapon die and halve the remaining speed of the target,

How's it sound?

>> No.37200806

>>37200668
Great!

>> No.37200826

>>37200803

Why should the die size be doubled?

Reducing speed of AoO victim or stopping it altogether is fine

>> No.37200854

>>37200803
It seems good. Personally I would also give as many extra reaction AoOs as the character has extra attacks. I don't think it's too much and gives some more edge to the fighter too.

>> No.37200864

>>37200765
the thing is I don't really have much experience converting stuff (newish DM) and most of the things I want to convert are 2e Ravenloft, where the monsters are supposed to be tougher /spoopier. Maybe I'm making a mountain out of a mole hill but I'm not exactly sure where to draw the line with converting specific monsters/BBEGs from Ravenloft.

Is there an idiot's guide to converting stuff?

>>37200778
too short my tastes.

>> No.37200890

It's >>37200854
I thought the additional weapon die was for each extra attack too. Randomly giving more power to AoO from the very start might make level 1 characters fear AoOs with all their heart.

>> No.37200904

>>37200826
It makes Disengaging much more useful and makes you think twice about just running through a crowd of enemies.

>>37200854
Throwing out even more attacks in melee. I like it but it might be a bit overboard. I'll consider it though!

>> No.37200920

>>37200890
I'll add another line then? "This extra weapon dice is only applied for one attack"

>> No.37200957

>>37200803
I liked the one where you get a number of attacks equal to your extra attacks.

>> No.37200973

>>37200904

But it technically makes AoOs superior to standard attacks which seems unsatisfying to say the least.

I don't know that would really solve the problem

>> No.37200991

>>37200920
Sorry I'm writing like a drunk for some reason, I meant that I think it's better to make it work like this:
>On a successful AoO, halve the remaining speed of the target.
Then on the extra attack feature ruling you add:
>Also, on a successful AoO add one additional weapon die to the damage.

So that this additional damage to AoOs will be gained only by martial classes at level 5, and the fighter gets 2 additional weapon dies at level 10 and 3 additional weapon dies at level 20.

>> No.37200998

>>37200957

I'm not completely sold on it from the standpoint of it making any huge+ creature with extra attacks absolutely devastating to close with.

I think you'd want to playtest it with some Giants/Dragons

>> No.37201015

>>37200957
>>37200991

Reworded it a bit. How does it sound?
"You can make a number of extra opportunity attacks equal to the number of extra attacks gained from your classes. These extra attacks of opportunity cannot be made if you are unable to make reactions. For example, a level 11 Fighter would be able to make 3 attacks of opportunity. On a hit, add one additional weapon die and halve the remaining speed of the target."

>>37200973
That's kind of the point. Moving away without Disengaging should be a big risk. It also happens to fit the campaign I'm planning since it will be mostly gritty melee in a low magic setting.

>> No.37201027

>>37200864
Just do literal conversions and remember that you don't HAVE to give magic items to people, and can in fact change monsters around. Converting some of the more non-standard monsters from one of the Ravenloft monster manuals might be interesting. Changing up their resistances might work too, so every player doesn't just magically know what certain things are weak against.

Temple of Elemental Evil is super easy though, everything is in the monster manual. Certain fights are going to be tougher than they could be for a standard 4 man group but playing it smart should see them through.

Also, turning the temples against each other in the actual Temple is always a sound tactic!

>> No.37201030

>>37200973
I think this pretty much solve the problem:
>>37200991
As one single attack the AoO is stronger than your standard attack, but when using standard attacks in your turn, you're going to get more damage overall with all the attacks combined.

>> No.37201060

>>37200998
Moving into the reach doesn't provoke AoOs in 5e, if I'm not forgetting something. So it would be absolutely devastating only to try and escape from said creature.

>> No.37201152

>>37201030

I'm just having a hard time wrapping my head around how a AoO which represents a stray attack in the midst of a ferocious melee should have more base damage than a regular attack.

If the bonus AoO damage is only for PC/NPCs with extra attacks I could understand it but otherwise you get weird situations where a mage's AoO with a staff is more powerful than his regular melee attack.

I'm just not sure that it doesn't create more problems than it solves which is always a potential problem with houserules.

>> No.37201189

>>37201152
Every melee attack is a stray attack in the midst of a ferocious melee, the difference between an AoO and a normal attack is that the AoO hits exactly when the guard is down because the enemy is trying to move.

>> No.37201210

>>37201060

For the sake of my sanity, I pretty much assumed that anytime something moves from one square that a PC/NPC can reach (even if it's to another square that you reach) that they can trigger an AoO.

Otherwise you get the weird situation where AoOs are harder to get if you have reach than if you don't.

But I can totally understand why most DMs wouldn't run it that way.

>> No.37201272

>>37200304
I disagree, I see only two tiers

tier 1 : lore bard (for all the previously listed reasons) and palladin (can fill all class rolls at once with smite, healing, best buffing in game , tanking, heavy armor)

Tier 2: everyone else
*( wizard sorc cleric druid become tier 1 at lvl 17.)

>> No.37201285

For AoO you have to role play them and not roll play them.

Pretend you're a little dumb monster dude.

Do you think "this little shits dagger is only going to do 1dwhatever +whatever" or "I hope that stupid fucking elf doesn't chop my ears off when I try to run away".

>> No.37201360

>>37201285

Yeah a lot of this problem can be solved if the NPCs aren't metagamed like crazy.

I'm generally okay if some NPCs and the PCs do the dogpile routine on occasion but in general I think most NPCs are going to focus on the threat right in front of them most of the time.

>> No.37201386

>>37201210
I think the best way is just considering in what direction the character is going.
If you go towards the enemy in their reach, no AoO.
If you go further from the enemy or around the enemy, AoO.

It doesn't seem like a complicated rule, I think.

>> No.37201427

>>37191678

Paladin related questions

Do people think Dueling is feasible to be that classic knight in shining armor, or should a Paladin be more built to go full nova with Great Weapon Fighting and be Sanger Zonvolt?

I read about the Paladin path that you can be a defensive paladin of nature (Oath of the Ancients). Thoughts on that?

Also, what do you think about the Oath of Vengeance? Makes me imagine the Paladin more like those angels from Diablo 3, especially Tyrael. Or like the Terminator, not stopping until the target is terminated.

>> No.37201481

>>37201427

Dueling Sword and Board with Shieldmaster feat is a beast at holding a line.

Unless you have no other PCs capable of handling nova chores I think you can avoid having to step on the toes of your fellow PCs.

>> No.37201511

>>37201427
I think the dueling/shield paladin is more smite-based, since smite doesn't care of what weapon you have, when you smite it's better to have the most defensive asset possible. But you can't smite all the time, which is obviously a problem. I think bard-paladin and sorcerer-paladin is probably where the duelist paladin works best.

>> No.37201531

>>37201272
Tier 3 for Champion Fighter

>> No.37201611

>>37199649
Hmm, good point. I'll need to wait to see if we'll have a million Legolas wannabe motherfuckers or not.

>> No.37201638

>>37199982
Make sure the archers, rogues, and mages are really cute.

That way, the others will risk their lives more readily to defend them, and assume a better defensive stance.

>> No.37201668

>>37200696
Harald Hairybottom

>> No.37201700

>>37201152
AoO represents fucking wrecking a nerd because that guy fucked up.

It could absolutely have a logical reason to hurt more; you're lucky they don't target a lower AC or some shit, because they could've easily justified that too.

>> No.37201706

>>37200696
Cuddlehugs the Manslayer

>> No.37201743

how do I into Druid?

>> No.37201764

>>37201638

>human female archer who is a bit tsundere to male fighter
>halfling female rogue who is a not so closeted perv
>elf female mage with silver hair

A-am I doing it right anon?

>> No.37201854

>>37198816
What would a game where every PC has all feats look like?

>> No.37201864

>>37201764
>no cute boys

What are you, gay?

>> No.37201880

>>37201764
That's bretty gud, Anon. They'll probably be well-defended.

>> No.37201890

>>37201700
The attack on its own is representation enough. It's an attack you wouldn't otherwise be able to make. It's not like their glowing weak spot opened up and you're comboing it for massive damage.

>> No.37201909

>>37201864

The EK is a elf "male" with long hair and a more than passing resemblance to Sephiroth

>> No.37201913

>>37201854
>Everyone is a fully armored, highly durable, super mobile juggernaut that each know at least a few spells and can chop a fucker clean in half with their chopping blades

It would be absurd.

>> No.37201947

>>37201854
3.5e

>> No.37202049

How do you guys organize your character sheets?

I'm watching the latest PAX video (which someone on /tg/ recommended, thanks it's pretty fun) and they have these binder things that I can't quite tell what they are.

If I'm not using the optional character details sheet I generally print mine double-sided, but having a "two-up" system like this actually looks a lot nicer.

>> No.37202129

>>37201743
git gud wisdom
pick circle of the moon
beg DM to let you see Bear

>> No.37202148

>>37202049
WOTC will probably release some kind of character portfolio eventually.

>> No.37202367

Would a vampire/undead hunter (ie, Blade) associated with the church of Kelemvor be a reasonable thing to create? What would Blade's stats be? Low charisma and int, high everything else?

>> No.37202489

>>37202367
Why low charisma or low intelligence? Blade has both a forceful, assertive personality and the cleverness and guile to fight more powerful beings than himself on a regular basis, plus knowledge of all the manner of supernatural creatures and disciplines.

>> No.37202546

>>37202367
The MM has a small blurb on PC vampires (page 295)

>the PC's STR,DEX, and CON go to 18
>they gain the vampire's damage resistances, darkvision, traits, and actions
>Attack and damage rolls for the vampire's attacks are based on strength
>the save DC for charm is 8+ the vampire proficiency bonus+ the vampire's charisma modifier.
>the character's alignment becomes lawful evil.

or do you just mean a guy that hunts vampires?
Ranger with undead as favored enemy, pick hunter archetype, and choose Acolyte background imo

>> No.37202571

>>37202367
Yes, Kelemvor hates Undead.

I have no idea who the fuck Blade is.

>> No.37202618

>>37202571
Blade is a half vampire that hunts vampires. He is from Marvel Comics and is best known for those three movies he did in like ten years ago starring Wesley Snipes.

no idea if the movies suck or not, never saw them.

>> No.37203316

What are party composition essentials in 5e?

Obviously magic is fun and flexible, but it sounds like you might actually need a big dick martial, if not a couple of them. Is this true?

>> No.37203533

>>37203316
well it depends on the campaign/adventure but tanky people are something you should have yes.

Barbarians, Paladins, Fighters.
a caster or two and maybe a skill monkey

>> No.37203538

>>37203316
The gameplay is so different at each level that it's really too broad to say this.

I would recommend the holy trinity. Someone to take hits, someone to heal, and people who will take down enemies.

We had pretty high success in our party of Cleric of Life, Warlock, Warlock, Fighter. The cleric hid in back and did healing (probably unnecessary), Fighter controlled the front, and we blew shit up. Worked well.

>> No.37203547

I want to bring back the wide variety of polearms. Anyone have any recommendations for stats? In particular, since the trident sucks so bad, I want something with Versatile that can be used alongside a shield.

>> No.37203660

>>37203547
>I want something with Versatile that can be used alongside a shield.
It doesn't make sense, because doffing a shield is a full action, it would be so much of a pain to switch you'd be mostly doing it out of battle anyway. You could just as soon carry a whole separate weapon.

>> No.37203661

>>37203547
Ranseur: 1d10 damage, heavy, reach
Fauchard: 1d10 damage, heavy, reach
Bill: 1d10 damage, heavy, reach
Glaive: 1d10 damage, heavy, reach
Guisarme: 1d10 damage, heavy, reach
...
etc.

>> No.37203708

>>37203316

In general I'd say the standard big 4 roles should be covered:

Melee Tank Fighter/Paladin
Arcane Caster Wizard/Sorcerer
Skillmonkey Rogue/Ranger/Bard/Monk
Divine Caster Cleric/Druid

If you have more than 4 PCs you probably can add in a ranged fighter of some sort or if the Cleric is a war cleric you can probably use the cleric as a melee tank.

My personal preference is almost always to push for

Fighter
Cleric
Mage
Rogue
Bard

because all the roles are covered and the bard can provide decent backup to the other 4 as well as handle face duties

>> No.37203766

>>37203547

90% of the polearms are functionally equivalent at the level of granularity 5e operates at.

Basically the only ones that I'd say that are significantly different would be be pikes (maybe less damage but extended range) and shit like mancatchers.

Even stuff like nagimaki could probably just use the twohanded sword stats.

>> No.37203783

>>37203660
Wait, different guy, but when the book says that equipping or unequipping a shield takes one action, couldn't that just be your item action for the round?
Shields are considered to be held in the hand, not strapped to the arm or anything.

>> No.37203858

>>37203783
>item action
wat

It's just an action, there is no "item action".

So yes, you could take off a shield in one round, but you're not doing anything that round. It's a big thing to give up in combat. You're better served entering battle knowing whether you want a 2-hander or a sword and board, instead of having a versatile to switch in the middle at the cost of actions.

>> No.37203882

>>37197070

I've just been reading a bit so far, but your response just confirmed the vibe I was getting. I think I'll play around with some of the quests and quest patrons, maybe think up a little intrigue.

>> No.37203884

>Hunger of Hadar spell description

>> No.37204039

>>37199290

Same here.

>> No.37204233

is this scale mail?

>> No.37204284

>>37204233

Looks like a leather scale hauberk with chain arms (I can't tell the chain extends under the scale.

The flex in the scales makes me think that that would be poor armor at best

>> No.37204321

>>37194049
We keep showing up and bouncing ideas off each other, so probably yes.

>> No.37204323

>>37203316
I have experience to 4th level. No martials are needed, as long as the group has crowd control magic. We function against brutish enemies just fine with entangle and web spells, then we drain hp with offensive cantrips and spells. attacks have advantage against restrained foes, so scorching rays and firebolts are quite accurate and effective against entangles foes.
Against foes with good defenses against restraining magic, I'll have to wait to find out.

>> No.37204378

>>37203661


Exactly.

Just pick your favourite niche weapon, pick whatever weapon archetype it's closest to, and switch the names on your sheet.

There is absolutely no need to have every goddamn weapon ever created in some fuck-off huge table.

Pic very related. It's just a fucking spear

>> No.37204429

>>37204323

Experience up to 7th level. My sword and board fighter is the reason we're all not dead.

>> No.37204559

>>37202618
First ones good, second and third are meh

>> No.37204642

>>37204429

Did you do anything specific to help make him stickier in combat?

Personally as a GM I tend to have a lot humanoid champions tend to focus on the heaviest armored guy as that's what is expected by their culture.

The skulkers and archers are expected to target PC archers and mages.

>> No.37204921

>>37203884

I looked up the source. Went from intense whyboner territory to outright laughter as the acts got more absurd.

>> No.37204941

>>37203858
>It's just an action, there is no "item action".
Well, yes there is actually (PHB 190), but upon reading, the shield doffing wouldn't qualify since what I'm talking about would be "item interactions, flourishes, and actions supplements" rather than actions in and of themselves.

I suppose versatile weapons would be more just for casters then, so they can get that free hand quickly.

>> No.37205041

>>37195643
DMG in mail, I might have to do this, my group got fucked up by the flu and holidays and more flu

>> No.37205076

>>37195789
There is not a single large thing in the mm? Odd...

>> No.37205082

>>37204642

I focused on a high defense, and lots of battlemaster maneuvers that let me fuck with the enemies strategy/ give advantage to my allies. ( Distracting Strike, Goading attack and Menacing attack have served me pretty well.)

Usual method is to either block off a narrow area to protect the squishier types (who rain arrows and magic down fuckers) or just to wade in and attack/Distracting strike/Shield Bash into prone everyone around me.

I took Heavy Armour Master and Shield Mastery for feats. Sentinel is up next.

Lots of fun.

>> No.37205139

>>37204921

What's the description say?

>> No.37205162

>>37205082

Sentinel + Shield Mastery Fighters are definitely the get shit done type of fighters.

Shield Dorf for maximum grumpiness and toughness

>> No.37205190

>>37205082
i've got sentinel at level 5 on my paladin, shit regardless of what you got.

>> No.37205304

>>37201210
Reach is already special, you give up aoo and get to attack a square away. Also that's what polearm master is. ..pretty tough to choke up on a halberd and do close combat. Don't like it? Use a sword

>> No.37205337

>>37205041
That sucks.

I made it a bit more interesting by going with 3d6 exploding rather than 4d6/drop lowest. I recommend it if you give this a try.

Its ironically not much slower than our usual games in spite of doing all the work myself, and its kinda funny in that my notepad file has basically turned into something like a video game RPG's combat log. (only logging exploration findings rather than combat)

>> No.37205350

>>37205304

Not everything with reach is a polearm bro.

I'm thinking about how Ogres and such work in terms of AoOs

>> No.37205359

>>37201864
Highly underrated post

>> No.37205372

>>37205337

3d6 exploding is going to have insane median and variancy.

>> No.37205521

>>37205372
I still use the stat cap of 20, and I don't pick which stats they go to (first roll goes to STR, second to DEX, ect) so I pick the class after the rolls.

It gives you highly unstable outcomes and even the really powerful characters will tend to have the stats in weird places.

>> No.37205566

>>37203316
It would be helpful if my party consisted of non-idiots, but two things haven't worked well:
1.paladin as only healer
2.no tank

Our first party: ranger, cleric, fighter and idiot wizard did great despite low rolls across most characters

>> No.37205736

>>37205566

Yeah relying on natural healing + pally heal is pretty sketchy. At a minimum you'd probably want to have an NPC healbot come along for the adventures even if they just dole out cures and healing potions.

Cleric can be an effective tank with a heavy armor + shield war cleric but it tends to struggle to handle it's share of the casting duties until it get war caster.

>> No.37205961

>>37205736
The paladin was replaced with war domain polearm cleric, the AoOs and second attack have been critical, plus he's tanky enough. The barbarian died and will come back as another pally, partially because the party is idiots and we need the extra healing.

>> No.37206102

Okay, Rogue stuff. Thief archetype gets the 'use magic item' ability at level 13, which seems nice...but I can't actually find the rules on magic items (presumably in the DMG?).

How important is this ability, /tg/ ? Does the arcane trickster make up for it with its half-casting? Can the arcane trickster use some magic items (because, you know, it can cast spells)?

>> No.37206150

>>37206102

Most classes can use magic items it's just that the thief can try to use some items that the standard non-casters can't like wands and shit.

Arcane Trickster should have no problem with wands.

>> No.37206197

>>37206102
it just means LV13 Thief Rogues can ignore all class, race, and level prerequisites of magic items.

>> No.37206391

What do you guys think about combining the toughness and durable feats? I feel separate they don't quite do enough to justify getting but if you combine them you get one hell of a feat for people wanting to play tough characters.

>> No.37206403

>>37206102
I didn't notice any items with race or level restrictions except the Axe of the Dwarvish Lords, which probably isn't going to show up in your campaign. I think it does allow you to use scrolls from any class' spell list without rolling Arcana, while arcane tricksters can only use wizard spell scrolls, and if the spell is a higher level than they can cast they have to roll Arcana.

>> No.37206516

>>37206403
Staves and wands are limited to wiz/sorc/warlock or cleric/druid, and the holy avenger is limited to paladins.

>> No.37206554

>>37206516
Are there any items with level restrictions? Or was that line just grandfathered in from previous editions?

>> No.37206563

could a lv 13 thief buy a NOT hobbit hole in the NOT Shire and never hit his head on the ceiling?

>> No.37206643

>>37206554
No level restrictions, although I think it's very improbable to get legendarys at lower levels if you do all the loot from the tables

>> No.37206676

>>37193741
This anon is correct.

>>37193671
This anon went full 3tard.

>> No.37206885

>>37205566
>has a paladin
>doesn't have a tank

I'm confused

>> No.37206960

>>37206643
The loot tables are weird. If you use them as written, you get more weird wondrous items than equippable items, and the consumables you get will have a similar weird-to-useful ratio. They're also very stingy about doling out permanent magic items compared to the treasure you get in published adventures. Though you can get two magic weapons and a reusable staff in the starter set adventure, it's quite possible that a party can get to level 10 without seeing a single permanent magic item if the DM is just rolling on loot tables whenever the party would logically find a treasure hoard. Which would be great for gritty campaigns, except that these players will be buried neck-deep in decks of illusions, bags of beans, and potions of diminution

>> No.37206991

Hypothetically, if my Half-Elf character fucks a qt human, will the child be some kind of...Quarter-Elf?

>> No.37207002

>>37206991
yea or 3/4ths human

>> No.37207045

>>37206960
>magic beanstalks every few miles across the realm
>eventually frequent commerce with the cloud kingdoms brings prosperity to all
>this new friendship is formalized by the royal marriage of the Crown Prince Stefan of Westmarch to the Cloud Giant Emperor's daughter Hildegard

Good End.

>> No.37207068

>>37206991
>you will never play a Quarter-Elf Monk specializing in Quarterstaves

True suffering

>> No.37207089

>>37206960
I can see your point, I have a feeling that the tables are just for the DMs who have no idea what to put down
Need a treasure hoard? Roll it
Need a quick dungeon and motivation? Roll it

>> No.37207139

>>37206991
Most likely human, has a chance to a be half elf

>> No.37207166

>>37207139
No Quadroons?

>> No.37207203

>>37206991
I know most settings don't do this, but I always make half-elves infertile, like mules.

>> No.37207260

>>37207166
I would think the human would have slight tinges of elven ancestry e.g having slightly pointy ears, being slightly slender etc

>> No.37207327

>>37207260
>elftouched

I could see it

>> No.37207349

>>37206960

I've been playing in Adventurers' League, with the DM running the various one-shots published for it. So far we're level 4, we've been on something like seven adventures, and our party has four permanent magic items. They're not super powerful, but they're there. The loot tables for levels 1-4 only give you a 15% chance of getting a permanent magic item in a loot hard, which presumably players find about once per adventure. If we went off of loot tables, we'd have roughly one magic item from the same amount of adventuring.

>> No.37207395

>>37207139
>>37207166
>>37207260
>>37207327
Why not full human or full elf?

>> No.37207472

Lend me your wisdom brothermen,

Level 3 basic human fighter, took the tavern brawler feat (gm is a kind soul) to make him a kind of Jack of All Fights. He also took maneuvers which help him to movehis allies around and knock his opponents down.

My guestion; next level, Toughness or Heavy Armour Master OR Heavy Weapon Mastery?
He has pretty amazing hp right now (rolled ten onboth levels and have decent Con bonus), but with Toughness he would be AN ABSOLUTE BEAST! The reason I dont automatically take the heavy armour feat is because I like the idea of him being kinda able to do everything and discard weapons and just grab new ones when he needs them.

What say you?

>> No.37207480

>>37207327
It work with any other half races really, a quarter orc would be slightly more burly, have a slightly off skin colour
Or do what >>37207203 says and make them infertile so that you don;t have to think about it

>> No.37207549

Ah damn I mean Heavy Weapon feat, sorry I cant quote stuff, writing from my mobile.

>> No.37207556

>>37207472
to be honest it sounds like you made up your mind already.

go with Great Weapon fighting

>> No.37207561

>>37207480
But if he's infertile, how can he be called a man, Anon?

Isn't that a little angsty?

>> No.37207626

>>37207561
He can still fuck things, he just won't make babies. Isn't that every man's dream?

>> No.37207642

>>37207395
It depends on what the other partner I guess,
Pure human or elf = most likely to be a pure breed, with a chance of being a half breed
Half elf = most likely half breed, with either chance to be a pure human or elf

>> No.37207670

>>37207626
Not if he's a fearless knight who wants little, chivalrous children.

>> No.37207683

>>37207561
Being infertile doesn't mean you can't pop boners
It just means your sperm (or uterus) doesn't work

>> No.37207691

>>37207395
That's how Tolkien did it. Half-elves who come of age get to pick which race they belong to, and thereafter they are treated for all purposes as that race. But for some reason interracial marriage isn't allowed, but what else can you expect from a book written by a racist

>> No.37207700

>>37207626
Why would someone dream of being a cripple?

>>37207642
What if the partner is a half-orc?

>> No.37207719

>>37207670
Isn't it vanity, nay, even evil to want biological children when there are so many neglected orphans in the world?

>> No.37207740

>>37207691
Elrond was just being a faggot. He was literally a half-elf descended from half-elves.

Like, he was legit just butthurt because his husbando Gil-Galad was dead and his qt waifu left him, and he was taking this butthurt out on others.

>> No.37207757

>>37207691
>But for some reason interracial marriage isn't allowed
Because the elf will outlive the human 100% of the time,as will their halfbreed child.
Also, if he was racist, it was a "product of his times" sort of racism, instead of the actual frothing racism of, say, Lovecraft.
>>37207700
No consequences sex. Shit, there are people who pay for that.

>> No.37207792

>>37207757
What's wrong with outliving your spouse? Was Tolkien also in favor of the practice of widow-burning?

>> No.37207827

>>37207792
It's all tragic and shit, I dunno.
Besides, you might notice that elrond is ignored in the end.

>> No.37207835

>>go with Great Weapon fighting

Yeah, its a really good feat.
Also what I forgotto ask; how is the Grappling feat? It looks like it would have great synergy with Tavern fighter.

>> No.37207863

What's the next supplement?

>> No.37207888

>>37207863
Bitch & Hoes: Can A Nigga Get A Table Dance? Vol. I

>> No.37207895

>>37207700
I dunno, that's why some people make half breeds infertile so you don;t have to theory craft on genetics

>> No.37207923

>>37207827
Marriage vows are typically "till death do us part." Not longer than that. Even a stodgy old Catholic like Tolkien shouldn't think it's wrong for widows/widowers to remarry, since Jesus explicitly said it was okay.

>> No.37208058

>>37207719

>Isn't it vanity, nay, even evil to want biological children

No. It's called being normal, you fucking eunuch.

>> No.37208100

>>37207835
>advantage against creature you are grappling
Decent.

>able to pin as an action
Useless, restraining both of you makes it bite you in the ass more than help you, plus restrained cancels out your advantage on attacks against that grappled creatre.

>Creatures that are one size larger than you don't automatically succeed on grapple escape attempts
RAW, absolutely useless--creatures larger than you don't automatically succeed on grapple escape attempts anyway.

>> No.37208113

>>37208058
>fucking eunuch

>> No.37208124

>>37207923
Who says he agreed with Elrond?

>> No.37208129

>>37208058
Normal people are neutral. A paladin is expected not to ignore needy children just so he can have kids who look like him.

>> No.37208142

>>37208058
>implying things considered "normal" can't be evil

>> No.37208165

I have a question about being restrained. If I start my turn restrained by the web skill for example my speed is 0. Now what if I break free during my turn? Do I get my speed back and can walk or is my speed still 0 for the turn?

>> No.37208188

>>37208165
uh no why would you still be restrained when you stop being restrained, you can move

shout outs to a real nigger

>> No.37208190

>>37208129
What if there were 30+ paladins in the same place?

>> No.37208203

>>37208124
He made it so that a half-elf automatically becomes the same race as a human or elf they marry. Elrond was opposed to the marriage because it would have automatically made Arwen human and mortal. If Arwen could have stayed an elf while marrying Aragorn, he probably would have advised her to just do that and just, you know, get over him after he dies.

>> No.37208258

>>37208190
They would have to arrange among themselves to make sure someone was caring for any forsaken child that crossed their path.

>> No.37208330

When did the /pol/tards get let out of their containment board?

Can we get back to talking about 5e instead of /pol/ discusses fantasy morality like mongs?

>> No.37208338

>>37208258
Oh god imagine an all-paladin party. Taking watch while camping is bad enough.

"Who's on child protection duty?"
"Me."
"All right, who's got saving the innocent?"
"Over here."
"What about suffering no evildoers to live?"
"Roger."

>> No.37208357

>>37208330

You realize this has always been a thing on /tg/, right? Just look at any 40k thread. Every other post is about morality and politics there.

Lurk more and be silent, child.

>> No.37208390

>>37208357
The Emperor did nothing wrong!

>> No.37208506

>>37208390
Sheev did plenty wrong and that's not even including the EU (may 90% of it burn in hell)


back to topic

I used the Isle of Dread playtest packet and long story short one of my players is a level three fighter 19 AC (splint and shield) with +1 long sword (Fimbric) so he has a +6 to hit,

Did I fuck up and if so how bad?

>> No.37208581

>>37208506
Not very bad. It's unusual for a 3rd level guy to have a good permanent magic item, but it's conceivable that a 3rd level guy could afford splint mail. You can get a +1 weapon pretty early in Lost Mines of Phandelver and Hoard of the Dragon Queen. Just be careful about doling out permanent magic items for another level or two, or make it something the fighter would never use.

>> No.37208816

>>37208581
well, his INT is 9 and he's a dwarf and some places will have more than 5ft deep water. Guess it depends on how inclined the Bard is to share his water walking ring (killing the pirate captain nets the party the ring and the sword)


here's the sword's info.

>> No.37208848

Are fighters useful in this addition or should I just roll up a wizard?

>> No.37208874

>>37208816
You turned your PC into Yukon Cornelius?!

>> No.37208986

>>37208848
They're all right. What kind of fighter were you thinking?

>> No.37209042

>>37208874
I'm the DM.

the PC (sadly) isn't really into D&D so much as just wants to hang out(he's a friend of my brother and I and why not have a 4th?). killing shit and getting loot is his big interest, probably be happier with 4E if he was interested.

>>37208848
Caster supremacy is still a thing but the gap is much closer than it was previously.

>> No.37209292

>>37208986
Melee fisticuffs fighter

>> No.37209315

Anyone else want to min max for the observant feat? Thinking var human arcane trickster. I'm gonna notice all the things ever.

>> No.37209444

>>37209292
As I think people have mentioned in this thread, fisticuffs isn't great in this edition. You have to be a monk to even use both fists in the same turn, and Str monks are gone, with all a monk's attacks being Dex based. You could be a brawler like in 4th, though, fighting with just a one-handed weapon and leaving a hand free to grab people or steal their weapons after disarming them.

>> No.37209553

>>37196524
I would just let them treat it as a fate point on top of its existing benefits
So it could be a free reroll or an advantage

>> No.37209679

>>37209292
>fisticuffs
Why am I not goddamn surprised?

>> No.37209683

>>37206516
Is it limited by actual class, or is it limited by spells on your spell list? IE, could an arcane trickster still use wands?

>> No.37210950

>>37201210
Moving around a polearms reach takes more movement, but there's more room to move inside their guard. It still leads to some weird mechanical situations on the grid but that's the basic idea.

>> No.37211130

>>37208338
What about any evil children we come across?

>> No.37211209

>>37211130
gotta smite all the evil anon

>> No.37211450

>>37211209

>> No.37211613

Someone's running a 5e Ravenloft campaign. What's the best way to play a proper Van Helsing?

>> No.37211661

>>37211613
Hunter ranger spec'd in vamps, or perhaps a champion fighter.

They aren't OPTIMAL but they are totally Van Helsing. Gotta see about getting a Doctor background too.

>> No.37211764

>>37211661
You could possibly tweak Guild Artisan to be a physician. Or Acolyte would grant the training in Religion necessary to know what shit works on undead.

>> No.37211906

>>37200304
>(smite/volley bard might be broken tier at lower levels)
You'll have to explain this to me. I don't see any paladin or ranger spells that are actually strong for their spell level right now.

>> No.37211945

>>37200577
In this vein, Sorcerer has 0 unique spells on their list. Anybody working on that?

>> No.37211951

>>37209683
Some can be used by anyone, some need attunement, some need attunement by spellcasters, some are more specific. An arcane trickster gets access to general spellcasting requirements.

>> No.37212012

>>37211951
Actually it's unclear if arcane tricksters count as a wizard for things like a staff of power. They use wizard spellcasting but aren't of the class.

>> No.37212025

>>37211945
I can virtually guarantee you that they'll get an elemental bloodline with the upcoming Adventurer's Handbook, and they're liable to get some unique spells too.

>> No.37212028

>>37200640
>(bards getting Paladin Smites before Pallys do, etc)
No fix needed. Paladin's spell smites are Magic Sword attacks and essentially universally inferior to just using the class feature smite. A bard who takes them will have single target debuffs that deal some damage and play like some kind of swordmage, not a smite-adin.

>there really isn't a bad class
Ranger reads like it was taken from a different game. It's probably the worst class and it's still playable and even able to shine in some moments.

>> No.37212060

When do you use a dice plus modifiers and when do you fall back to the passive skill?

>> No.37212086

Does anyone see any instance where share spells would be useful at all? The only one I can really see is tree stride, and even that isn't that great.

>> No.37212102

>>37201511
>>37201481
Does the shield not count for the purposes of dueling's effect? I suppose it isn't a weapon, but it doesn't seem to fit the theme of a duelist.

>> No.37212123

>>37207472
>I like the idea of him being kinda able to do everything and discard weapons and just grab new ones when he needs them.
Does he have 20 strength? Go for 20 strength.

>> No.37212208

Quick, I need some fun, short side quests to do in the small mining town of Leilon; I've got a drinking contest, and an assassination for the zhentarim so far. Want one more short, interesting little tidbit to build the world. Something uniquely Forgotten Realms.

>> No.37212229

>>37212086
And by share spells I mean the ranger beastmaster feature that you receive at level 15. Few spells the ranger gets access to have self as a target and a lot that do then require a ranged attack.

>> No.37212301

>>37197592
To be fair, the dice eventually (not nearly to the level of certain predecessor systems) mean very little compared to everything else you do...

If nothing else, the DMG does outright point out that it's a good idea to modify the base form of items for players. Hilariously enough for your 'belmont-like' idea, the exact example they give is making a Holy-Avenger into a Flail!

>> No.37212306

>>37212060
Passive Perception (and sometimes Investigation) are for when players don't realize that their skills are being tested. Like for example: a character rolls Perception when he's actively looking for someone but uses passive Perception when he isn't

>> No.37212319

>>37212102
Shields aren't on the weapon list, so moray of us think duelist is for sword & board.

>> No.37212344

>>37212319
>moray

>> No.37212345

>>37212319
Moray? Many.

>> No.37212360

>>37212319
Ah okay, makes sense. Thank you!

>> No.37212363

>>37212344
I shouldn't post from my phone during overtime. Go Sharks.

>> No.37212480

>>37205190

Paladin is shit, or Sentinel?

>> No.37212630

>>37208100

Yeah. It has one useful feature that might as well been folded into Tavern Brawler in the first place.

Y'know what? Fuck it. That's a new house rule.

>> No.37212646

>>37212060
As a player? Your DM will decide when either is more prudent.

As a DM? You decide whether either is more prudent.

If your going to be rolling that check a lot, more than once or twice per discrete action or scene or social encounter, just use the passive.
Or, if you want to gauge if a character will simply notice something surreptitiously. You might note the players' passive Insight scores, and someone may, for instance, pick up that the Minister of Finance seems stressed and a little guilty for some odd reason (red herring or not).

Many times it's fine to take their passive instead of rolling. It's safe to default to that as being an auto-roll unless there's a time or threat or risk element to worry about.

>> No.37212668

>>37208357

/tg/ is the All-Board.

>> No.37213188

>>37212229
>>37212086
Just looking at the list, but these stick out as being at least *potentially* useful:
Cure Wounds on yourself, cure your companion too. That's the big one.
Longstrider
Jump
Darkvision
arguably, Find Traps
Speak With Animals (tha't'd be an interesting conversation)
Lesser Restoration
Locate Animals or Plants
Locate Object
Pass Without Trace,
Protection from Poison,
Nondetection,
Protection From Energy
Water Breathing
Water Walk
Freedom of Movement
Locate Creature
Stoneskin (Fucking GREAT for spell sharing)
Commune With Nature

And, of course, any spell from other sources such as multiclassing or Magic Initiate. Magic Initiate's pretty good for this, actually, as Druid and Cleric give you some interesting options which also play very nice with Share Spells, and Ranger in general. Namely: Guidance, Thorn Whip, Protection from Evil and Good or a free daily casting of Cure Wounds, and more choices besides. A fairly compelling option.

>> No.37214384

New thread

>>37214230

>>37214230

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action