>Official /5eg/ Mega Trove v3:
https://mega.nz/#F!BUdBDABK!K8WbWPKh6Qi1vZSm4OI2PQ
>Pastebin with homebrew list, resources and so on:
http://pastebin.com/X1TFNxck
>June 2016 Survey
http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/june-2016-dd-survey
Dungeon traps, what's the best you've had?
>>48024818
Haha, thats evil.
Any ideas for new warlock invocations? Anybody have a homebrew with some?
>>48025017
I made a few a while back but I can't find them, there was one for each pact boon plus a few others for spells and creature abilities
>>48024818
I need to remember that. But on that note I'm trying to come up with traps or puzzles that would exist in an abandoned cave. One I have is room with a lake taking up most of the space with a path that goes from one side to the other and thins out the farther you go. PCs will have to make a DEX check or they fall in and may get tangled up in some kind of plant. Failing their check to get loose they get more wound up in the plant and start to sink.
I'm looking for a few more suggestions though of natural hazards, nothing man made
>>48025207
can you remember any off the top of your head?
>>48024818
-room floods with water
-all doors to room have a hidden portcullis that shut when trap is sprung
-whole room is circular and rotates
-whole room lowers to a lower level
-walls move in maze like corridor behind party to change hallway configuration
-small circular room (1-2 characters fit in at once) wall rotates and has one door opening several rooms are accessed by this room (force split party)
-magic door looks normal but is spring loaded so it shuts on its own "door is one way" try to exit and it leads to a different door in dungeon
-walls have glowing orbs on sconces to light the dungeon ... they work like security cameras so NPC can veue the party
-dungeon has no lights and traps work to remove light sources (blindness darkness)
-whole room has floor/ walls/ ceiling with small 1in holes every 3in ... when trap is sprung 1in metal rods with sharp tips shoot out of holes and go all the way to other side of room
-room fills with gas (poison/ knockout/ mind altering)
-small noticeable treasure (illusion) in room behind secret passage that is only door ... door is one way with no exit once closed behind character ... remains of trapped victims on floor with there loot
-decorative statues come alive and attack
-room becomes extremely hot/cold
-illusion floor ...looks like a pit is solid floor. looks like solid floor is pit
-floor is 1ft tiles with small slits.. player steps on tiles and tile is spring loaded to drop 3in and allow hidden 3in barbed spikes to stab and grab feet
>>48020491
I think you'd get the left pattern if you origined from the ground going up. And yeah, you'd be hurt by that.
Basically, some spells pick targets in an area like Slow and some target everything in an area like fireball. Either way, if you're in the area that includes you.
>>48021221
I'm not sure how much use you'll get out of a bomb that vanishes when it takes any damage, but there's probably not a balnce problem with allowng them to work.
>>48024818
Man that art is bad. Guy looks like he has a broken leg glued to the floor.
>>48025609
dumping real traps
>>48025736
>>48025749
>>48025763
>>48025779
>>48024818
While traversing a typical dungeon with me the human fighter a dwarf barb and a tiefling soccer the two martials got stuck in a room that closed behind it and started filling with poison gas. We were expecting some really damaging poison that could reck our shit. We were level 5 and had 40-60 points or so of health. We started banging on the door to get out, first tick of poison is only d6.
Both I and the dwarf player actually scoffed irl. And I just worked on the door with my portable ram as the dwarf actually went back to a chest in the room to get gold.
>>48025763
The good old Punji Stick and/or "Shit on a stick" is also classic.
>>48024818
I pretty much only use death traps, but I use trap rules all the time for environmental hazards.
>your step gives way to a nest of rats twisting your ankle and releasing the swarm against you
>you try to move along the edge of the cliff but the rock gives way and the edge of the cliff is rapidly sliding down the mountain
>you hear a sickening crunch as you see a boulder tumbling from above
>the wet stone has enough dust to become hazardous, you slide into a shallow pool with jagged rocks
Alternatively I try to keep them as simple traps that are set with limited preparation. The only thing I don't like are dumb random traps that so many dungeons have just to piss off players, and that have no way for the dungeon creator to circumvent.
Rolling a level 9 sun monk. DM says I can take two uncommon magic items or one rare item. What should I take? Thinking of a sun blade
>>48026064
Sunblade isn't a monk weapon. It counts as a longsword, so it may not be the best choice. Bracers of Defense are pretty good for a monk. If you want a weapon, a Flametongue can be a short sword.
>>48026064
Depends on the weapon you want to use. I am not sure if it is in this edition but see if you can get a Amulet of Mighty Fists +1 or 2 if you want to fist.
>>48026137
It's called Insignia of Claws in the Hoard of the Dragon Queen book.
>>48026109
Wood Elf Monk. Boom.
>>48026161
Still won't work with the bonus action of Martial Arts. That requires a monk weapon. Even if you're proficient with a longsword, it isn't a monk weapon.
>>48026064
Bracers of defense are a good rare for monks. Cloak of protection and winged boots are both uncommon and pretty solid.
Alternatively, you could be a bro and get a portable hole if the party doesn't already have something to the effect.
>>48026211
He could still use anything but martial arts so it wouldn't be the end of the world. He would just need to only use flurry of blows for every attack.
>>48024818
Andrew Bander is a sick fuck. So sick I'm gonna steal this.
>>48026270
Don't know much about the sunsword, but longswords aren't finesse or a monk weapon, so he'd have to use strength for it, no?
>>48026270
Yeah, but you could also pick a short sword version of a Flame Tongue as a monk. Sunblade mechanically doesn't do much for a monk. I guess it's a d10 weapon for them early on.
>>48026300
Sunblade is a finesse longsword. That's the main benefit to it.
I really can't stand this shit anymore. Wasn't this supposed to be the edition of bounded accuracy? Ability scores cap at 20, but all races get bonuses (because racial penalties are RACIST and this edition is DOUBLEPLUSGOOD and TOLERANT) and as a result scores are immediately closer to that 20 cap. And then, attribute increases are fucking +2? Why not +1, or +1 to two different scores at least? Instead of just encouraging people to fucking max out their favorite score? This shit is autistic as fuck, it's the same "instant gratification" that Wizards of the Coast switched to with 4e to make D&D a pussy-ass hugbox for pussies. It's a fucking game, you can't grow a pair of balls for a fucking game? Same shit where you can't die in Adventurer's League because they're worried that will scare off customers. Wizards of the Coast are such jews they completely destroyed a half-way decent game system to satisfy (1) grognards, who don't play this game anyway, they play their shitty autistic OSR garbage. So you fucked up there, WotC! and (2) cheeto covered spergs who want their LEVEL UP as fast as possible and don't care about putting any effort in anymore, they just want instant gratification.
This edition disgusts me. It could have been so much more, but it is basically a 4e "lol action surge once per day" mixed with 3.5 feats that are semi-competent but still shit for the most part, mixed with a complete absence of anything else.
>>48026433
2/? because I seriously have had it with this shit
Why the fuck are there feats that give direct bonuses to stats anyway? It's literally "this feat is only worth half of an ability score buff so we'll throw in the other half because we're uncreative pieces of shit." Fuck you, Wizards of the Coast. There were so many solutions to this problem, but they would have required you to INNOVATE instead of just masturbate to the same old shit you've been doing, then make game design decisions that contradict each other.
Case in point, they designed proficiency so that your numbers only go up every 5 levels or so. THEN they give a +2 every 4 levels to an attribute score. Oh, and you can take one of the shitty feats if you want to. Cool. But if I really wanted to max out my Strength, I'll bang my head against the ability score ceiling after 2 level-ups at most. I *could* do +1 to two different ones, but why the fuck would I do that? Might as well get a benefit NOW and another benefit LATER, than no benefit now and two benefits later. If you believe at all in concept of time having value, then the second option presented is objectively fucking worse. So why does it exist? It exists for odd numbered scores, sure. But that's it.
If Wizards of the Coast wanted an actual game instead of this hyper-inflated ass fest infused with mountain dew and cheetoes, they could have just removed that, removed the "all races get +3 to everything lulz" crap that unbalances the ability scores even more, and simply put back the ability score penalties that were perfectly balanced and perfectly fine.
> but a bloo bloo I can't play my orc wizard
Yes you can. Oh noooo he'll have a 5% less chance of enchanting someone cause his save DC will be lower. Well he's a fucking ORC which are LESS INTELLIGENT. Your orc does get a higher Strength which may be useful in some situations. Not really, though, seeing as 5e is caster edition 2.0
cont. below.
>>48026433
>>48026524
You seem really upset at the concept of minmaxers, which have existed since the dawn of time.
No, really, all your problems stem from min maxing classes.
>>48026524
I'd complain about the tranny shit but that's already been done to the moon and back. Sexuality is not a fucking forefront of D&D, and this little "progressive" blurb is going to give every mutilated nutcase an entitlement complex to have xir half-male quarter-female quarter-moonkin have genderfluid sex with everything in sight. But fuck that, I could live with that if it were a stain on a great product. But it's a stain on a mangled mess of good ideas and bad, that show that Wizards of the Coast learn the wrong lessons from every mistake they make.
Also, please make my day by replying to this shit with "bait" images and other off-topic taunting, and refusing to address any of my points. Which I will summarize at the end for you in simple words just to make sure you can understand.
Feats are an absolute bollocks fest as well. They are meant to be a substitute for an ability score increase, except half of the feats CONTAIN ABILITY SCORE INCREASES. They also take away one of the few ways to differentiate your character mechanically. How the fuck are you supposed to make an interesting 1st level character? Or even beyond that? By picking between 1 or 2 class abilities like 4e had? Oh, you can pick the move and attack for double damage maneuver, or the attack for double damage and move, then attack for half damage maneuver. Fuck that shit.
I know that's not what 4e was actually like, but the powahs blended together after a while under a horde of try-hard sounding names.
Now we have "superiority dice" and action surges and second winds (just like 4e) that we have to remember and cross off then erase and re-cross off as we use them. As if tracking HP wasn't enough. Now we are basically spell casters tracking our once-per-day abilities. So there goes half the reason to play a fighter. It's the same resource management bullshit that 4e had, except without a unified system to manage it.
>>48026640
Feats are optional rules. Just dont play with them.
>>48026602
My problem stems from the fact that the objectively best choice for leveling up directly conflicts with the ability score cap because WotC decided that +1 every 4 levels wasn't good enough. At least in 3.5 you only got +1 every four levels; 5e is literally double that, AND it institutes a cap that wasn't there before for "bounded" accuracy.
You know what you could have done instead WotC? Just made it +1 to two different ones as the ONLY option. That FORCES diversification, and hell, it even makes more sense, because you sure aren't using only ONE ability score during your adventures, are you? This would actually force ability scores to be more spread out.
And yeah, I understand that you don't HAVE to do this. You can take feats instead, yep. Or you could use that other option. But when you present an option that is better than the other two, then call anyone who chooses that option a powergamer, then why the FUCK did you put that option there in the first place?
This isn't even something a powergamer would do. This is something a normal, reasonable person would do, and Wizards of the Coast presents options that literally contradict their design goals as well as other rules within the system.
>>48026640
well make it so that in your game you get just +1 to 1 stats if thats your problem. Feats are optional, just like Variant Humans. I love the superiority dice but if its to much for you, Champion. That leaves you with second wind and action surge, once each per short rest. I mean if this is to hard to keep up with there is always Dungeon World anon.
>>48026695
Problem solved.
>>48026671
> Feats are optional rules. Just dont play with them.
How does that solve any of the problems that I outlined in my post? You still have far fewer character options, far less capability to differentiate your character mechanically at 1st level.
Actually, unless I'm playing a human, it comes to the same anyway. I roll my scores, I pick which fightan style I want.... and that's it! And that's assuming I'm playing a fighter.
If Wizards of the Coast had put actual effort into learning from the mistakes of 3.5, they could have made feats an every-four-levels thing that EVERYONE got, with no fucking bonus feats, and then a 20th level character would have, what, six feats total? As long as they don't have long-ass names, they could easily fit on a character sheet. And if they had paid attention to what made feats suck in 3.5 they'd have been fine.
But they didn't. Why? Because they wanted to pander to grognards, WHILE ALSO TRYING TO RECAPTURE THE 4E CROWD
This is fucking retarded. This is like trying to broker a truce between the Nazis and the Jews or something. They are diametrically opposed styles of play and I do not have the space to explain why here. Visit an OSR thread and you'll see.
So what was the result? Grogs are disappointed by all this once-per-day class feature jack off shit, and post-3.x players are pissed that they got feats taken away from them.
Sure, 5e is more "balanced" but that doesn't really say much, does it? It's safe. It doesn't try to solve anything, it's just a bunch of half-assed solutions turned into a tamer 3.5. There are no new or interesting ideas. Advantage and disadvantage? Already done, and the same result could have been achieved by simply saying "yeah let's limit the number of potential bonuses in the game."
What a disappointment. I haven't been more disappointed in years. There are good, if not original, ideas in 5e, but there are also more of the same mistakes that will weight down D&D forever.
That all has to be copypasta considering how fast it appeared.
>>48026433
>And then, attribute increases are fucking +2? Why not +1, or +1 to two different scores at least?
well it was +1 to 2 in the playtest.
and feats were divorced from ASIs.
also, and i feel like this will set of a storm of shit posting, but d20 based systems are so swingy, you need to stack up bonuses to feel like you're actually advancing in what you do. its kind of the nature of the game.
and i wouldn't call 5e caster edition 2.0.
>>48026805
So you're just now realizing that D&D isn't actually that well made of a game, its just fun despite its shortcomings?
No edition of D&D has very good rules.
>>48026798
You're a fucking idiot. You are using the EXACT SAME EXCUSE you people use to attack 3.5 and 4e players.
"Just rule zero it bro :^) "
So, here's the law of /tg/ then. If it's a system /tg/ likes that has flaws, it's "just rule zero it bro!" but if it's a system /tg/ doesn't like, then it's a broken system.
Do you not see the double standard here?
I am outlining some actual bad design here, and you are excusing it by "just do it my way" when you cannot explain why the way the system does it is better. If it is better in some cases, then that is just my opinion. If it's NOT better, then there is no reason for the game to have been designed that way, and thus it is flawed.
And please don't reduce this to "lol it's good cause I said so :^) " bullshit, it's childish and shows your inability to have a discussion about a game.
And I have no interest in playing Dungeon World. That is an entirely different game. My issue is not in the complexity of the rules, it is in the stupid extra bookkeeping I have to do to play a fighter, the same stupid once-a-day fighter abilities that should have died with 4e, and the stupid contradictory ability score increase rules that seem to go against one of 5es core design goals.
>>48026870
So go play something else. You don't like D&D. There won't be another edition of D&D for a few years.
>>48026433
+1 to an ability score doesn't actually do anything half the time. So levels with ASI wouldn't actually do anything. And, like puppies, dead levels are not much fun.
>>48026805
on the other hand all the character options. With enough feats for everyone to pick one every 4 levels there would be a mess. It just that adding more "options" to the game makes it harder to balance. Hell its impossible to ballance as it is and it would never be. Thats why wotc have been so tame with releasing new content. God all the books of the god damm 3.Xe.
I also fear of the game becoming like M&M where you are actively trying to not break the game.
>>48026848
Actually, no, I am just a very fast typer. Typist? Whatever.
But go ahead and google it, I don't think you'll find it anywhere else.
>>48026853
So the playtest was less retarded then. I am curious why WotC decided to literally fuck up when they had the right answer. Goddamn it that makes me depressed. I downloaded the playtest and was excited for it but didn't get to actually play it.
> but d20 based systems are so swingy, you need to stack up bonuses to feel like you're actually advancing in what you do. its kind of the nature of the game.
Very true! But this is more proficiency's fault than anything else. See, proficiency is an excellent idea. It ties saves, attack bonus, skills, etc.. all into one.
But, an increase of one every four levels? Or five? You only increase by 20% over the course of play, from raw proficiency. Ability score increases add another 15%. A 20th level fighter has... what? A +11 to hit? A +12?
I'm not saying go back to the 3.5 bonus insanity, but I felt that 4e actually did a decent job with the 1/2 level as a bonus. Proficiency would have been as a 1/2 level +2, as long as there were some AC increase options as well. Perhaps not, but I would have liked to see proficiency top out at +10 instead of +6. Just feels weak.
> and i wouldn't call 5e caster edition 2.0.
Fair enough, but already I am seeing abuse of spells, and "builds" that let you destroy the universe at higher levels with some Wish / Simulacrum combo. Sure, they are probably flawed, but the return of that mindset concerns me.
>>48026854
I disagree. I've played a LOT of other systems, and D&D is still a fairly decent game. The core ideas of the game don't correspond to "traditional wisdom" in RPG design (whatever the fuck that means anymore) but the core concepts of the game are still fun. And the system has huge potential. yet it is continually wasted by developers who refuse to THINK, or make idiotic decisions based entirely on marketing rather than creating a good game that will drive marketing. Unfortunately, 5e won a lot of awards anyway, simply for not being TOTAL SHIT, and thus the developers pat themselves on the back and decide they must have done something right, even though they have no idea what the hell that is.
>>48026894
>So levels with ASI wouldn't actually do anything. And, like puppies, dead levels are not much fun
You mean like 3/4ths of the levels anyway because of how slow proficiency advances? I don't see how its any different.
>>48026951
You're falling into the exact same fear-mongering mindset that the developers used when they literally threw away all of the previous editions' ideas.
> With enough feats for everyone to pick one every 4 levels there would be a mess.
Why?
> It just that adding more "options" to the game makes it harder to balance.
That's why you actually playtest your new content, or make it self contained and thus difficult to create "epik combos" with.
3.5 was broken from the core. Still a fun game in my mind, but if anything, the splats were more balanced ,not less.
Personally I'd love if they added more feats that actually made martials more interesting. Weapon style feats that gave special maneuvers you could use with particular weapons. Yes, you would have to balance them, but there are VALUABLE lessons to be learned about feat design from 3.5, that WotC completely ignored. Oh wait, they didn't ignore them, they just learned the wrong lesson and decided to fuck up feats entirely.
> I also fear of the game becoming like M&M where you are actively trying to not break the game.
Yeah and this isn't M&M.
OK what is wrong with you and the fighters. You have three things to keep track of: Second Wind, Action Surge and Indomitable. Place a tick next to the name if its available, x if you used it. You can't go more vanila than the Champion Fighter
>>48026870
Fighters don't have any, ANY, once a day abilities.
Not a single fucking one.
You have once per short rest abilities, which ends up being less bookkeeping than 4e. I can't speak for 3.5e, but a I know a big issue some people have with fighters is you have fucking nothing but full attacking to do. However, if you happen to enjoy that, just fucking take the champion archetype, and have TWO once per short rest abilities to use. TWO. Second wind (not the same as in 4e), and Action Surge.
You are overexaggerating these issues. Issues they are, but they aren't as big a deal as you make them.
>>48027093
I'm pretty sure it's just attention-whoring instead of real grievance.
>>48027014
>Everyone's so stupid. Everyone but ME.
>>48027032
3/4ths of the levels give you a feature from your class to play around with. Very few levels are actually dead in 5e, it's part of why I like it.
Yeah, you might not be getting a +1 to hit, instead you might now be immune to disease, or have something else you can do on your turn.
And then next level, you'll get a +1 to hit and not much else.
Is this a problem? If you don't like it, it's probably not the system for you, but personally I like this design decision.
>>48026889
Yes, and I no longer care to look forward to a new edition. I have moved on to other systems. I still play D&D occasionally but I've realized the well-made system I've hoped for, will never come, because WotC switches developers too often, switches design goals too often, and tries to accomplish contradictory design goals and fails, or attempts to accomplish a design goal with contradictory methods and fails.
I don't begrudge you enjoying 5e, for as I've seen people saying for some reason (dunno if this is some new "meme"?) it is "pretty good." But that's all it will ever be when the developers continue to fuck up like this, have INCREDIBLY reactionary solutions to past mistakes, and refuse to learn the actual lessons there.
They get burned by touching a stove, and their reaction is to run as far away from it as possible, not even bothering to study it and perhaps figure out how to turn off the stove.
Gay as fuck analogy but it's the closest thing i can think of to what I am trying to say.
I am leaving the thread now but I will bookmark and read your responses later. Good luck 5eg.
>>48027119
The complainers seem to lose sight of the fact 5e was made for people who wanted the core ideas of D&D in a simplified form that was easy to get new players into. 5e accomplished that.
it just occured to me how "OP" the conjuration wizard 2nd level arcane tradition is. let's say that I am to take the burglar feat and use that tradition to make myself infite lockpicks/bombs/anything out of thin air. that would arguably make me better thief than arcane trickster is or am I missing something here.
>>48027144
So what does that have to do with 4th level ASIs being only +1?
>>48027000
>Fair enough, but already I am seeing abuse of spells, and "builds" that let you destroy the universe at higher levels with some Wish / Simulacrum combo. Sure, they are probably flawed, but the return of that mindset concerns me.
meh autists will be autists. no competent gm would allow even close to 90% of the dumb things i've seen posted online. and that goes for non magic stuff too.
>I would have liked to see proficiency top out at +10 instead of +6. Just feels weak.
i don't understand your point. i thought you disliked that things ramped up so quickly? but you want a fighter to end up with an even higher attack modifier? i need to re read your original post.
>>48027169
I mean, sure, but you don't get all the extra shit the rogue would get, like all those skill proficiencies. No one will be a better skill monkey than the rogue, except possibly the bard.
>>48027164
>5e accomplished that.
It accomplished that and nothing else. If you chase down "easy for new players to get into" that is a very flexible design goal and very easy to accomplish. And it is almost impossible to exclude the core ideas of D&D from the game. Basically what you are asking for is a rules-light D&D. There are myriad ways to accomplish this. The actual end result is not necessarily the best solution.
D&D 5e could have accomplished it's goal and far more without compromising said goal. It made decisions based on marketing rather than improving the system, and reaped a reward. Perhaps that is D&D's largest issue; unlike other RPGs it is actually meant to make money and thus true quality and actualization will always be compromised for marketing reasons.
>>48027169
>or am I missing something here.
you're missing that your dm won't let you make bombs with it because the objects are supposed to disappear if they take any "damage" which i would include lighting on fire or smashing on the ground.
lock picks i'd allow, but the situations in which i would take away your gear are few, and in those situations using your abilities to give yourself a way to escape a dungeon or whatever would be what i would want you to do.
>>48027176
If they were +1, you would have more dead levels, which aren't terribly fun.
Great, you got a +1 to str, bringing you to 17 strength.
Nothing changes on your sheet, and you feel like you haven't made progress, as the only thing you get at 4th level is the ASI, you don't get a class feature or anything else.
With the +2, you're getting SOMETHING, at least. Or, if you had, say, 15 str, you could take a feat that boosts your str by 1, or increase two scores. It's versatility. Most of the time the +2 will be the more powerful choice, but it won't always be.
>>48027219
>you're missing that your dm won't let you make bombs with it because the objects are supposed to disappear if they take any "damage" which i would include lighting on fire or smashing on the ground.
My DM is fun, so I can totally do that
>>48026894
>puppies aren't fun
Do you have autism?
>>48027188
>i thought you disliked that things ramped up so quickly?
I do. but there is a middle ground. I felt 4e handled it best, and what i mean by that is that that a number increase every other level preserves the "feel" of improving while not ramping up to a +20 bonus by 20th level. In fact, exactly half that.
There are many issues with the 1/2 level system, I am not suggesting using it, simply that the numbers involved fit my tastes well. It's just a "feeling" thing. It would require AC increases to compensate but personally a level 20 character doesn't feel right without an AC in the low to mid 20s.
Again, this is just my opinion, I don't want this to detract from the other things I am saying here, which are far more important.
>>48027255
>taking shit out of context
Dead puppies aren't fun, anon.
It may not have been grammatically correct, but that was other anon's intended meaning.
>>48027215
I don't keep track of WotC's financials or sales. In my area, tabletop gaming is growing much bigger than it had been in decades past because of 5e. Do you have something to back up the idea that it's failing beyond your personal expectations?
>>48027253
i mean sure cantrip level bombs, but i don't think its supposed to let you blow open bank vaults or whatever
>>48027255
fun is just a buzzword
>>48027259
>but personally a level 20 character doesn't feel right without an AC in the low to mid 20s.
Because you're trying to compare one system's numbers directly to another.
Yeah, 4e had you get to like 50 AC by the epic levels. Would it have made a terrible difference if, instead, 5e let you get to 500 AC?
AC and to-hit modifiers are relevant to each other, not other systems.
25 AC is fucking high in 5e, in 4e and 3.5e (to my knowledge) it's fairly low.
The actual number doesn't fucking matter, what matters is how it compares to other numbers in the system.
>>48027238
So, instant gratification.
Unless you are saying that nothing happens at 4th level in these classes, the ability score increases are superfluous to that. It's not a "dead level" if you're still getting something else.
I also fail to see how it's different from proficiency increasing slowly.
But your point is legitimate, and I see what you're saying.
>>48026671
>NO
Rules are optional. Just don't play with them.
Sorry for being sharp, but removing a bad rule does not make the game any better, you just remove features.
If i wanted to play a freeform game i don't need any rules, i don't even need a game, just some recreational drugs and good company.
Rules are the bones and muscles of a game, what the players do with them is the skin and personality.
5th edition can quickly become a hollow skin.
>>48026870
Short and sweet: the ASI/feat situation is fine in general. Not giving everyone an automatic number of feats reduces complexity and forces designers to not use feat patches, feat taxes, or mandatory feats. Maybe you'd prefer a rogue. They have even fewer rest limited abilities. Characters are distinguishable at level 1, moreso by level 3. There's many races, classes, and backgrounds for each character to stand out. More or less than 5e is just a preference. I don't see anything that's broken. You just don't like it.
>>48027259
I DMed 3.5 before 5e. I hated the fact that numbers got so high that I could no longer use lower level creatures for a level 18 party effectively without stacking templates upon templates. I couldn't just use older monsters in new ways because they numerically could not compete anymore.
A goblin might not be a huge threat to a level 20 character even in 5e, but at least a horde of them has a chance at being a threat outside of lucky natural 20 rolls.
>>48027259
Just tell me anon! Tell me instead of complaining and I'll do it!
>>48027275
honestly shitting out infinite number of cantrip-level smoke bombs is better than anything rogue can do to escape at that level.and lets not kid ourselves and say any group actually makes it to levels 7+
>>48026894
That's why you can choose between +1 to two, or +2 to one
>>48027318
There's a big difference between "this one rule is optional" and "rules are optional". If you don't want feats in a game, then you can completely ignore them and you likely won't even notice the absence. But if you don't want feats in your game, you don't just throw out the whole game as a knee-jerk reaction.
>>48027297
>The actual number doesn't fucking matter, what matters is how it compares to other numbers in the system.
True, except that all D&D editions use the same d20 modifier. So if you halved all the attack bonuses and ACs, yes they would still be the same relative to each other, but not relative to the core dice mechanic.
If you have a powerful fighter with AC of only 19, then it is easy to land a blow on him. I understand that hit points = plot armor and all that, and I don't disagree that AC fluff in 3.5 and 4e is a bit ridiculous. But, a gnoll or goblin should be an almost automatic hit for a 20th level fighter. In fact, he should be able to almost automatically hit them even with disadvantage and other penalties. Now if he has +39 to hit, that's kind of overkill. That was the 3.5 and 4e issue. But if his attack bonus is only +11, and his AC barely 19 or 20, he's relying on his hit points to soak up these guys. Which makes sense, it's simply counter to what I feel, which is that a high level fighter should lose very few hit points from fighting a couple dozen orcs. Not that he should be impossible to hit either.
Again, it's just an opinion thing, as I said above.
>>48027380
Anon, the fallacy is "if the rule is just going to be thrown out, why include it"? There has to be a good reason FOR the rule to exist, otherwise there is no reason for it to be there and it is bad design.
>>48027398
The dispute is if the rule is good. Just because one person thinks it is not good does not make that a universal truth. Actually playing 5e for a few years made me realize that 5e was made to make it lower stress to DM, since DMs tend to be the chokepoint around which groups are formed.
>>48027255
Let me clarify for our slower reader. Like levels, dead puppies are not much fun.
>Do you have autism?
Not that you could prove, but I am posting from mobile.
so would dragon fall to the ground if its hit by Sentinel reaction ?
What things from Pathfinder would you port over to 5e? (It would theoretically be balanced to 5e)
>>48027320
>Not giving everyone an automatic number of feats reduces complexity and forces designers to not use feat patches, feat taxes, or mandatory feats.
I fail to see why feat taxes / patches are ever necessary?
> reduces complexity
There is plenty of complexity in the class features. And picking a feat at 1st level is not that hard. Yes, I understand why they wanted to go without it, for that extra simplicity. But if you build the game entirely around someone's first time playing it, you are going to end up with a game that is good for only that. I learned that lesson with my own design.
> Maybe you'd prefer a rogue. They have even fewer rest limited abilities.
But I want to play a fighter. And to be honest, a lot of these rest mechanics don't make sense. They are dissociated from the game world. I consider them to be metagaming.
> I ran out of breath while fighting, but i got a bit of adrenaline surge. Too bad I can't do that again til I rest for 8 hours
I will give them credit that at least they made the once-per-rest abilities make SENSE this time. At least for fighters.
>>48027321
Yes. That is what i love about bounded accuracy, too. Orcs became completely irrelevant by level 8 or so, and by completely irrelevant i mean that even several hundred of them were not a real threat.
>>48027398
Not everybody's going to throw out the rule. That's the point of it being optional.
>>48027259
4e actually wanted +1 per level, it just spread those out among different sources for the pcs. Monster math was transparent about it.
>>48027373
>and lets not kid ourselves and say any group actually makes it to levels 7+
I had a group make it to level 13 and that was with slow XP advancement. Another campaign is at level 9 and would be at level 12+ if the GM actually understood that 200 XP per session is not enough for 8th level characters.
This is in 3.PF though. And I understand that I am lucky compared to most fa/tg/uys when it comes to holding a group together.
>>48027304
>Unless you are saying that nothing happens at 4th level in these classes
Look at the fucking book. Nothing happens at 4th level in these classes.
>>48027373my group is leve ninealthough it's probably because our DM is This Guy
>>48027444
I understand that. I was simply responding to the other anon whose answer to everything was "just homebrew it." It's an answer I see everywhere and it annoys me because it's irrelevant to a discussion of system quality.
And for all my complaints, 5e is still not a bad system overall. I'd rather play 3rd edition or some other RPG entirely, but it's not like the game is intolerable. I just think a lot of the game's design is either contradictory or reactionary.
>>48027487
Not Pathfinder but I would love to see an Elder Evils and Mind Flayers of Thoon port to 5e. I will probably make it in the upcoming days.
>>48027373
>cantrip-level smoke bombs
What are those? What do they do?
>>48027444
Yes, it is made to give a dm a easier time.
I believe these edition wars are pointless.
Person A believe that rules light is the way to go.
Person B believes that more rules are better.
They will never agree about a system.
>>48027373
I finished a game that went from level 3 to 20 in February. Current game is at level 8 and I planned it to go to 20.
>>48027568
Social dynamics tend to make the game more than the system, but it certainly helps to make a system that's easy to run. If you lose a player or two due to extenuating circumstances, the game can continue. If you lose a DM, the game is done.
Is Ghosts of Dragonspear Castle anywhere in the Mega? And if not does anyone have it? Thanks a lot
>>48027500
Except it's not an optional rule, it's part of the core RAW. A player, by RAW, is entitled to taking +2 to an ability score. If you take that away, you are limiting that player and he or she has a right to resent you for it. It's like "core only" in 3.5, except in this case even worse because you are actually contradicting something from the core rules.
That is my issue with "just homebrew it". You are taking something away from the player. I argue that it shouldn't have been there in the first place. The impasse is instant satisfaction versus setting the system up for diversifying ability scores. If the ability score cap weren't in place I'd see it being just fine, but in its current incarnation I don't understand why the 3-18 ability score system exists at all, from a pure design standpoint. If every ability score increase is meant to have an actual +1 bonus to the characters rolls, the whole 1/2 score - 10 bonus thing is extraneous. At least make some use of it.
But when a +1 to a score is worth a +2.5% chance of success, I guess it's time to admit the entire game system is fucked anyway, so there is that.
>>48027499
>And picking a feat at 1st level is not that hard
Just homebrew that everyone starts with a feat at level 1 then? Probably disallow the variant human to avoid a couple of shenanigans.
I understand you don't like how ASI scales from previous posts, but maybe you can modify that too, or ask the DM. After all, the goal of using a system is to have fun.
>>48027487
I don't like how impersonal the skills feel. I totally miss skill points and be able to say if my character is better at X than Y despite that skill having the same bonuses.
>>48024818
I might be in the minority, but I really hate these types of "LOL SO DEADLY" traps. I feel that traps should be used sparingly, logically, and effectively.
If the dungeon was meant for anything other than being a deathtrap a la Tomb of Horrors, then traps are a pain in the ass for the inhabitants. Place manually-activated traps like portcullises or trapdoors like in Jabba's palace from Star Wars 6, place disarmable traps protecting treasure vaults or other important but low traffic areas, but not in the middle of a main hallway.
Think of how much effort must have went into creating the dungeon in the first place, what the inhabitants would have expected in terms of defense needs, and how much more work it is to construct elaborate and wondrous mechanisms.
>>48027535
Then why not make something happen in those classes? Or have feats as a default? Or just have a +1 to two different ability scores and accept the fact that yes that is actually equivalent to a +2 later on, but without the instant gratificaiton factor.
>>48027321
The problem is that the game never told you that level 18+ characters are akin to demigods, and can actually challenge divine beings.
If you stopped character progression at level 6 to 8 then you would not have had this problem.
>>48024818
One that I'm waiting to use is a big stone statue face that overlooks the entrance to a temple. Outside the temple is a riddle and several charred skeletons. So obviously that statue is frying anyone who gets it wrong.
The riddle has no right answer. It's s trick to make people shout out so the statue gets triggered and blasts that location.
The way to bypass it is to not bothering with the riddle and just walk in
>>48027562
I'd rather play a system where all the core classes feel relevant. Atleast 5e actually has a sense of class balance. 3e has horrible class balance, the worst of any edition.
>>48027568
No, I agree that more rules light is better, but D&D is not a rules light game, and you can have a rules-light game that still provides a lot of character options and emergent complexity without slowing down the game.
People act like rules-light-versus-heavy is an inherent conflict that can't be overcome with innovation. That's wrong.
The kind of games I run now are narrative-y Savage Worlds games where I don't have to write anything down and the game goes very smoothly.
This is mostly because the game does not use initiative or hit points the same way D&D does, and generating an NPC is pretty much a non-activity because you can make up stats as you go along.
D&D will not ever have that because it would contradict many of the game's core design principles. The other functions of rules light? Nonconfusing rules and unified mechanics. Which can be done well in any system without contradicting the changes I am outlining here, which are mostly related to chargen. And being easy for beginners. Which I consider mostly a marketing thing, because I fail to see why a single extra step that would benefit players in the long run, is worthless next to enhancing a beginner's first time. It just doesn't make sense to me. The first time you play is just one time. Why design the entire experience around that?
>>48027647
Yeah, I didn't want to stop character progression there, and I had fun with my game. I just had to be very creative to explain where all these high CR threats came from that weren't around when they were lower level.
>>48027620
But the system is not built or balanced around having feats at level one. For one thing there aren't enough feats, and because feats are balanced to be equivalent to a +2 ability score (something I thought was a very good idea at first but later realized created unmeetable standards, hence the feats that give +1 to a score to make up for that) and because there simply aren't enough feats.
I also miss skill points, but let's face it, the 3.5 or even Pathfinder way of handling them was far too complicated to be worth it. Removing the class / cross class skills would be a step in the right direction, but it would blur the lines between classes (pathfinder had this issue; wizard became skill monkey over rogue after a while due to lack of cross-class limitations).
>>48026870
>extra bookkeeping I have to do as a Fighter
what extra book keeping????
Unless you go EK fighter is probably one of the least book keepiest classes out there, aside from maybe Barbarian.
>>48027682
>I'd rather play a system where all the core classes feel relevant.
That's fine. I'm not advocating for 3.5 or begrudging anyone playing 5e. I just wanted to point out the flaws I see... to no real consequence, because what can I do about them anyway? Create yet another 'D&D but better" system?
I just feel that D&D fans are so used to getting fucked over that they consider a mildly competently designed game to be amazing by comparison and thus look at it with a halo effect.
DMs who say that it's easy to run, they can play a character that feels relevant, etc.. these are things that are SUPPOSED to happen in ANY roleplaying game. It's like a starving orphan amazed at being given stale bread. Not that I am saying 5e is bad, just that it could be so much better.
I actually must abandon the thread now, I have report to finish by 5 pm and my boss will be very pissed if I don't finish it.
Hey there, new player here coming over from Dark Heresy, Shadowrun 4e, nWoD, Call of Cthulhu, and Edge of Empire. I'm having a bit of a problem and I was wondering if someone would be so kind as to explain how magic in this game works. I read through the part in the PHB a few times now and it's throwing me for a lopp. Thanks in advance!
>>48027799
What about it don't you get?
>>48027835
Mainly the deal with this slot system and spells per level. Is that how many they cast or prepare? It's not like anything I've seen and I'm trying to wrap my head around it.
>>48027499
>I fail to see why feat taxes / patches are ever necessary?
They aren't necessary, but they happen. On the other hand:
>There is plenty of complexity in the class features. And picking a feat at 1st level is not that hard.
There's a lot of classes and a lot of levels where you don't pick your class features. You picked your class and all your features are laid out in a line for you. That is a whole lot simpler. Also, it isn't just a feat at first level. It's a feat every X levels, which means you have to make enough feats for every character to have a choice of which feat to take every time. You know how 4E had at least 4 powers at each level? Like that. If there wasn't a choice of which feat to take at each level, it would just be a class feature and not a choice of feat. That's a lot of feats, and you usually end up with some of them being expected and eventually mandatory.
You could make changes in that direction, but that complexity isn't better or worse, mechanically. From a marketing perspective, I think the simpler format is the right choice.
>But I want to play a fighter. And to be honest, a lot of these rest mechanics don't make sense. They are dissociated from the game world. I consider them to be metagaming.
You are wrong. You should probably not ever use the word dissociated for mechanics ever again, too, since you clearly don't know how to use it.
>>48027884
How many spells you know/can prepare is on a per-class basis, described in each class' section. Sorcerers and warlocks have a set number of spells they know, wizards can prepare (wizard level + intelligence modifier) spells from their spellbook, clerics and druids can prepare (cleric level + wisdom modifier) spells from their entire class' list, and so on.
Slots are just predivided MP. To cast a spell you have to expend a spell slot of that spell's level or higher. Except for cantrips ("0th-level spells"), since those are spells that casters know outright and can cast at-will.
>>48027562
>I just think a lot of the game's design is either contradictory or reactionary.
A ton of changes are reactionary. Same as the changes going from 3.x to 4e were reactionary. They aren't contradictory though.
>I'd rather play 3rd edition
The value of your opinion, already deprecated by proximity to a meaningless rant, just plummeted to previously unimaginable levels.
>>48027884
Each class can prepare an amount described in the PHB. For example wizards can prepare int mod + wiz level spells so a 16 int 5th level wizard can prepare 8 spells total. In order to cast a spell it first needs to be prepared and second you need to spend a spell slot of the spell level or higher. Let's say a 5th level wizard prepares burning hands and some other spells that don't matter. The wizard can expend 1 spell slot of 1st level to cast it leaving him with 3 1st level spell slots and 2 2nd level spell slots. The wizard can also choose to cast burning hands as a second level spell to expend one 2nd level spell slot leaving him with just one left.
>>48027884
Spells slots are how many you can cast in a day. Each class that prepares spells has rules for how many they actually prepare. It's usually "levels in this class + spellcasting ability score modifier" except for Paladin where it's "Charisma modifier + half your Paladin level" for how many can be prepared.
Each slot can be used for a prepared spell of that level or lower. Slots do not have individual prepared spells assigned to them. You choose which prepared spell you are using at the time you choose to use the slot.
>>48027644
> instant gratificaiton factor.
Getting any gratification at all is not wrong. You already, presumably, put in the effort to level up at all. Making the ASI an actual functional ability just means you don't need to add another extra ability for every class at every ASI level.
>>48027672
Make sure the answer to the riddle is silence.
>>48027644
Not every player wants to increase 2 different ability scores and will see the +1/+1 as a waste. The ability score cap already enforces some diversity.
>D&D
>Instant gratification
>Can take weeks to gain one level
>Instant gratification
New lows in trolling.
Due to shenanigans my group of 5 that I DM has just become a group of 7. How fucked am I? Any advice? The original 5 understand that there'll be less out-of-game talk and they're prepared to put in more effort, and the 2 new members have never played a pen and paper game, though I've already helped them design their characters.
>>48028224
I was in a seven person group for a while, and I'm currently in a different seven person group. It's a little excessive. I think six people should be the upper limit, with five people being just right.
>>48028342
Yeah, 5 was my limit, but with these new 2, originally just one of them wanted to join and I decided I'd let him because he's new in town and I wanted to help him out, and his girlfriend (the other new player) offered to be my assistant DM (She loves organizing, taking notes, etc.). But now she decided that she also wants to be a player, so I've had to break my own limit of 5-6 for this.
>>48028398
>and his girlfriend
Ya dun goofed.
>>48028423
I knew the risks when I allowed it. They aren't all weird and attached or anything. They mostly just act like friends, and they've been together for a few years now so I'm not too worried.
How do I design interesting human bosses?
>A juggernaut of a man uses his magic hammer to smash through buildings, pursuing the party through city, ruins, etc, and rustling up whatever denizens there are
>The priestess shouts that she is not alone, and the floor tears open, revealing a writing pit of bones
>They drop on the party from above, like a pack of clever wolves, and vanish as quickly as they came
>>48028455
Always have them monologue about morally ambiguous things. Players love that.
>>48028612
But then I'd have to cut the monologues about how the PCs should go fuck themselves.
>>48028629
Okay then have him say "Go fuck yourselves. Now excuse me I have to get back to my loving wife and children to help them get through the death of their dog. Also I am doing all this stuff to save the world from a greater evil."
>>48028455
Make player characters. Let them fight a level 6 paladin and a cleric, a wild shape Druid with a conjure animals ranger. This gives them a taste of stuff to come.
Or think of something bad ass like a crazy tinkerer throwing bombs, and trying to take over a town with robotic soldiers, and figure out how to apply it to DnD. Make him a guild artisan and give him a bunch of warforged thug/berserker level minions.
>>48027884
Say you have an 8th level Wizard with Intelligence 20.
Their spellbook contains 20 spells (6 at level 1, plus 2 more for each level from 2-8). From this spellbook, each morning they can prepare a number of spells equal to their wizard level plus their Intelligence modifier (which at Int 20 is [+5]) - so they can prepare 13 spells per day.
What this represents is subjective, but I like to think it involves them memorising the incantations and actions required to the point they can cast them perfectly in a split second under combat stress without having to reference anything from their spellbook and no chance of getting one of the gestures even a hair off.
They cast these spells by expending spell slots. These represent the raw magical power the character can draw on to power their spells. They're separated into discreet levels as a holdover from when d&d casting was more truly vancian, which leaves 5e sitting midway between vancian casting and more of a 'mana pool' approach. If you cast a third level spell, you expend one of your third level spell slots. You can choose to expend a fourth level slot instead if you want (and some spells get more powerful if you expend higher level slots to cast them), but you can't use a spell slot of a level lower than the spell's level.
Example: Fireball is a third level spell. If you cast it at third level it does 8d6 damage. Because it is a third level spell, the lowest slot level you can spend to cast it is a third level slot. If you expend a fourth level slot to cast it though, the damage goes up to 9d6, and so on, adding another d6 of damage for every level higher you use to cast it.
>>48027955
>>48027978
>>48027979
So how do we decide at the start of the game what's in his spell book. Would anyone be kind enough to give like a situation breakdown?
>>48025017
Might help.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/kctrparz2sf00xd/Complete%20Warlock.docx?dl=0
>>48028716
He gets to pick.
A level 1 Wizard has a spellbook containing six 1st-level spells. The wizard player gets to pick what those spells are, by selecting them from the Wizard spell list in the PHB.
Every level he gains, he gets to add two more spells to his spellbook in the same way. They can be of any level that he has spell slots to cast with - so at Wizard 3 he can add two 2nd level spells if he wants, then at Wizard 5 he can add 3rd level spells, etc etc.
Wizards are actually one of the more complicated caster classes.
The Cleric, for example, just picks their prepared spells for the day directly from the Cleric spell list in the PHB - they have access to all of it at all time.
Wizards, on the other hand, have an amazing spell list in the PHB, but have to pick only a few from it every level to build up their own personal spell list - their Spellbook - and they prepare their spells from that every day.
>>48028716
Each class is different but for wizard at level 1 you start off with 6 spells in your spellbook. Each level you can add two spells of a level you have spellslots available. For example at second level you can add two 1st level spells because you only have first level spell slots available. At third level however you can add any combination of 1st or second level spells to your spellbook. Wizards are also unique in the fact that when they find a scroll of a spell they are able to copy that spell into their spellbook permanently after using some time and gold.
So to play a necromancer and getting a literal army of skeletons I be a wizard, bag of holding too many piles of bones, cast Animate Undead at fifth spell level, summon five undead, but I have Undead Savant so I double that. 10 skeletons, attack with short bows, on bonus action, all day.
Sound good?
>>48026854
I don't think that's true. I feel 4th for all its flaws has a cohesive and fun combat rule system. This stemmed from well defined keywords imo.
>>48024818
This was my greatest puzzle trap:
-a room with a locked door, which can't be opened or broken down
-2 arm sized holes, 1 on either side of the room
-in each hole is a grip
-when two different characters are each gripping one, you text each player this message
-"your characters lose the ability to talk, and neither of you can talk in real life. You see a message appear in your vision that reads 'the last to let go shall receive a great reward, the first shall receive a great punishment'"
- the trick: they have to let go at the same time or else the will both lose an arm
It works best with three players because then there's someone who can help discern the situation
>>48028826
No.
Necromancy Savant lets you halve the monetary and time cost to copy a spell scroll out into your spellbook. It does not affect spells you cast.
Animate Dead lets you animate and control four skeletons or zombies. You need to cast that spell every 24 hours on those four skeletons/zombies in order to keep controlling them. Casting at a higher level lets you animate or maintain control over more undead.
Casting Animate Dead a second time will animate or maintain control over another set of skeletons/zombies. And so on, and so forth.
So maintaining undead basically costs you the spell slots used to raise them permanently, for as long as you control them - because you need to cast that spell every day to maintain them. If you dedicate all your spell slots to controlling undead, it's possible to control a truly beastly army, but at the cost of your own arcane abilities.
>>48027626
Obviously the denizens of the trapped dungeon would have secret passages and alternate paths they would use.
Tombs would be the most understandably trapped dungeons since they're a resting place for the dead and their treasures that have no business being opened up.
Trap upon ingenious trap would be to stop grave robbers/monsters/necromancers from having free reign of the place
>>48024818
New Oslos guide to mon-mons when?
>>48028826
Just know that if you build a spooky army the dm and players will hate your character because that means an army's worth of rolling.
>>48028826
Being a guy that controls skeletons is more like a curse desu.
>>48029206
Why not use horde/mob rules?
>>48029196
Whats that?
>>48029241
MM 2 lite
>>48029196
Nomnoms?
>>48024818
What about traps that monks would use to protect their monsastery?
>>48027672 would be a good start, I think.
>>48028933
Level 3 casting means one, level 4 means 3, level 5 means five. 5 skeletons are being casted animate undead. And I'm sorry I meant Undead Thrall, that means when I cast animate undead on a creature, I can target another creature. I'm casting it once but it targets 5 skeletons, so I can target 5 more. With one spell slot a day I can cast it. If I decide to use a four and three spell slot that can go to 18, with the same math as above, but remember a level 3 casting only gives 1 plus copy.
So using a 5, 4, and 3 spell slot every day gives me control of 18 skeletons, without concentration, with buffed damage and health, and they all fire on my bonus action. Is that better?
>>48029206
Yeah just average damage and it's just a ton of rolls. I know what I'm doing not deciding for 20 minutes.
I was wondering, how much magic realm is to much magic realm
See, I'm DMing for a group of freinds. We play fairly often together.
But we're starting a new adventure now and one of the players made a character that is fairly magic realm-ish.
Well the charecters personality and story is totaly ok. But the race is the problem. He took a big part of the charecter description to the race and "how they breed" ect. And the physical apperence of the charecter had the same problem.
But the race itself is well balenced and we played the first session and he never did anything that would be considered wierd.
Should I let him keep going with the charecter despite it obviusly being his magical realm? Should I even throw him a bone since the rest of the group won't notice it or care at all?
>>48029450
Explain in more detail?
>>48029450
What is the race?
And as long as he keeps the details to what is necessary for the conversations and only jerks off when he isn't around you guys it should be fine.
>>48029450
>Makes a post about magical realm-y races being used by players
>Doesn't actually say anything about the race
How the fuck are we supposed to know how magical realm this is?
Hey guys, sorry to ask here but I figured that this was as good a thread as any.
Does anyone have the .pdf for Planescape? It would be greatly appreciated as I am on short notice.
>>48024818
No adventurer worth their salt would jump on a rope obviously prepared in advance for them to jump to.
Has anyone EVER done that?
>>48029489
To make something very long slightly less long.
Basically he has a race of demi-humans that is only Female, they capture men of other races to breed with. Keeping them as breeding slaves for the entier tribe for years on end.
They also have a massive mating cycle. And once it's mating season they get uncontroebly horny.
He made this as a major thing in his charecters bio.
>>48029537
Lamia.
"Real" lamia as in half snake.
>>48029556
I'm terrible at discribling thease things. Sorry.
But >>48029687 is more or less it.
>>48029687
>>48029450
Honestly that seems totally fine. Kinda strange, but as long as he doesn't do weird shit in-game I don't see the problem. Then again, he's probably just waiting for mating season to start
Only tangentially related to 5th edition, but I've got a question about the 5e SRD in roll20.
When you make a character sheet into an NPC, the macros look gorgeous when rolled. But when you roll the macros from a regular PC character sheet, they look like absolute garbage. Does anyone know a way to fix this?
>>48029687
>>48029720
Well that's definitely something. I would say it's not much worse than playing a drow, just don't bring it up and if it comes up just make it quick and to the point.
Like if you were trying to describe sex wth your co-workers, would you go into every detail or just gloss over it.
I want to try playing D&D, but I don't know anyone who does and there is no gaming or hobby store where I live in hicksville, USA. I know there are places to coordinate online but I don't really know where to start. Any pointers for something looking to get into this sort of thing? Apologies for newfaggotry.
>>48026640
That progressive blurb has existed since the 70's.
>>48029790
I'm an idiot, it was in the pastebin.
![playdoh-twist-n-squish-turtle-playset-63424-0-1417083604000[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/JyjIFg4.jpg "playdoh-twist-n-squish-turtle-playset-63424-0-1417083604000[1].jpg")
>>48028693
I compare it to one of those play doh sets. Your spells prepared are the mold shapes. The doh tubs are your spell slots. There are different sizes. Some molds can make use of the extra doh and some can't. Either way, once you open a tub anything left over gets druid out and useless. Of course you have to use a certain minimum amount of doh or it doesn't work at all.
>>48029757
>he's probably just waiting for mating season to start
Well that will be an intersting thing to DM.
Should I handel it like >>48029769 said or should I do it another way?
>>48029790
Roll20 is where people play online mostly in my opinion. You need to get caught up on the Players Handbook or PHB, the more you read it the better you will be at the game.
I fully endorse buying the boobs but don't buy them immediately, I have all the pdfs for the official books on my phone.
Go on roll20 make an account look for a game and apply to them. It takes time and there are horror stories but don't let one time make it not fun. And really look for somewhere nearbye because they do exist and they are better for fun.
>>48029854
Books* though being a girl will get any tabletop player to want to teach you how to play. Don't just be the healer though, cause there is more to the game than just keeping people alive.
>>48029358
The necro features is +1 animated per cast, not +1 animated per target. It's +1, not X2.
>>48029854
>I fully endorse buying the boobs
>>48029854
Thanks for answering, bud. I'll be sure to do that.
>>48029891
Well I guess you have me there then, never mind necromancy is a bunch of bullshit. 6 fucking 1/4 CR skeletons for a level 5 spell is bullshit, lasting a whole day isn't worth shit if they get mowed down with a Shatter. I'd rather just get 8 wolves with a level 3 spell for an hour.
>>48029196
November 15th.
>>48027955
>>48027978
>>48027979
>>48028795
>>48028811
I think I have basic idea now. When I get home I'll have to take a bit more of a look at the slots/cast system. Now are the other classes radically different when it comes to magic?
>>48030013
>Now are the other classes radically different when it comes to magic?
The only one that is really different is the warlock. They get far fewer spell slots (4 max) that scale automatically (up to 5th level), but they get them back after a short rest instead of a long rest.
>>48030013
The rest are more roleplay based save for warlock, but you do the same things with different spell lists. And other abilities that can change spells, but the big difference is warlock.
Why is Foe Slayer at 20th level, instead of, say, at 1st?
>>48027784
I wasn't a D&D fan before 5e. I don't like being able to pick from 40 races and abilities, because it just encourages me to look up a guide on what a "proper build" is, instead of just making up a character. I also dislike huge numbers and having to remember a dozen different ways of "hitting the enemy with a sword," and not really knowing why I have that ability over someone else. I tried playing a Shaman in 4e, and I could summon a healing rain once a day, but was it actual rain? Did people get wet? Was I changing the weather? No, it was just "heal because magic, once a day for balance." I also had a spirit bear, but was it tangible? I actually couldn't find anything that said whether it was like an apparition or I could ride it, or if it had its own personality and name or was it just me. I also remember there was much debate on whether you and your pet could move in one turn or not and my DM said we couldn't, and I believe your movement is hindered somehow by being attacked, so it took me and my bear the entire session just to get around a shed.
Regardless, those things are fine and cool in a video game, but feeling that separation of fluff and mechanics makes it very difficult to get into your character. Most of the people I saw playing 4e knew nothing about their race and was only concerned with moving minis on a board, and optimizing their damage and positioning. I would've rather just been playing a video game at that point. In 5e, the fluff actually tries to explain the mechanics and are packaged in a neat paragraph or two.
I also hated 4e's art. Didn't like a single race just by looking at their page. 5e's art isn't perfect, either, but somehow I find it easier to ignore.
I wouldn't be against playing other TTRPGs, but 5e's the only one that inspires me to play. It's the first game where I actually wouldn't be against playing a dwarf or a cleric and I used to hate both of those. I've read a little of other systems but nothing's intrigued me.
>>48027382
>But, a gnoll or goblin should be an almost automatic hit for a 20th level fighter. In fact, he should be able to almost automatically hit them even with disadvantage and other penalties
Why?
Why do you equate levels to power levels, and not your character being more EXPERIENCED?
>>48029687
/tg/, rate this race mechanically that I've been screwing around with from one to meme
Contosi (makes sense in my language)
+1 DEX
+1 CHA (might need to eliminate one of these for ballance)
Resistance to Psychic Damage
Size Medium, Speed 30 feet,
Description:
1) Humanoid with either a light blue or ashen blush
2) They cast a shadow with the were-shape of their fable.
When creating a contosi, they get to pick a variant called Fable, and the according benefit
Fable of the Coyote
+1 STR
Fable of the Raven
+1 DEX
Fable of the Spider
+1 WIS
Fable of the Snake
+1 INT
Fable of he Fox
+1 CHAR
At level 3, the Fable can be summoned as a familiar (leaving the contosi shadowless)
Lorewise, contosi are me trying to come up with a "cousin" to the tiefling, someone who has parallel origins, but is seen more under the Celtic perspective of this archetype, rather than the roman catholic.
>>48026640
> TRANNIES REEEEEEEEEE
It's like 1 paragraph in a 300+ page book. Frankly I'm a huge fan of Wizards handling it so succinctly.
Better this than Paizo.
>>48030724
It's neat. I'd specify that the rules for the familiar either do or do not follow those of the Find Familiar spell, depending on what you want them to be capable of.
I'd suggest +2 Dex and +1 to the Fable bonus for brevity, but what you've got is pretty cool. What's the setting?
Would it be reasonable to give a monk a sun blade, that's a shortsword instead of a longsword?
>>48030037
>>48030088
What's the difference with warlock?
>>48030808
Did you read the first post that you just replied to?
>>48030822
I did but I'm having trouble understanding it. Mainly the fact that they scale and that they only get them up to level 5. What happens after level 5, and by scale I assume it means that they get more powerful at each level but how do they get more powerful.
>>48030808
They get very few spell slots, all of which are stuck at the highest level available to them. So a level 5 warlock can only cast 3rd level spells and a level 9 or greater warlock can only cast 5th level spells. A warlock's spells come back with a short rest though, rather than a long rest like other classes. Additionally, they are very reliant on their cantrips, mainly Eldritch Blast.
>>48030893
More damage, longer duration etc.
By level 5, anon meant spell level 5.
And after they attain their 5th level spell slots, they don't get any higher level spell slots.
>>48030782
The setting isn't a *hard setting* but theme is a fantasy southern europe during what is known as the "Discoveries" era (give or take a century around the sixteen, seventeen century?)
I'm brainstorming my next character at work and don't have the PHB .pdf on my phone. Someone mind posting a snip of the "adventurer equipment" table for me?
>>48030782
thanks, by the way.
>>48030986
Underrated setting, imo. Lots of sea and arabic options, and you could equally pull something from either greek, or south american and be more plausible then when a mysterious vodoo gypsy woman just shows up in the middle of court.
Got bored and made something.
http://pastebin.com/Uta0wRYF
>>48030893
The warlock is probably different enough from other spellcasters that it's easier to just really read the warlock class pages, but I"ll try to explain it.
They don't have a chart for slots like the other casters. They just have a number of spell slots and all their spell slots are at the same level, based on character level. This caps at level 9 where they get 5th level slots and at level 17 when they get 4 maximum slots at a time. Their spells for higher levels, where other casters get 6th-9th are the Mystic Arcanum abilities which are just choose a spell from the warlock spell level chart and you can cast it once a day.
They balance this out with stronger at-will options from invocations and regaining their normal spell slots on short rests instead of just once a day.
Anyone here ever played as a Warforged or the Krynn Minotaur? How'd that go?
>>48031189
Would you want other classes that use the Warlock spell slot format?
>>48031417
They'repretty good.
>>48030013
Bard and Sorcerer have spells known instead of spells prepared.
Clerics and Druids know their entire spell lists but still have to prepare a set amount, as opposed to the Wizard only knowing what's in hi spellbook and being able to prepare from that subset.
>>48031476
Probably not. Without the warlock's other features, pact magic is pretty limiting.
The Warlock gets more out of its Patronage Features, Pact Boon, and Invocations than it does from Pact Magic. Another class would have to fill similar gaps without being samey. I'd happily await more Patron options, though.
Gonna do a Thief who goes all out with the gear, talkin' full Rob Liefield amount of pouches with caltrops, smoke grenades, acid vials, crowbars and other loot, Iron Spikes and climbing gear, the whole shebang.
Ant suggestions for odd gear combos to try out in the field?
>>48030787
Yeah. It's not broken for its rarity level. The discussions only came about because RAW it's only available as a longsword.
>>48030724
I like it, but it's a little bit under powered. A Variant Human gets pretty much this except psychic resistance, plus a feat.
Tieflings get all that, plus two spells, and a few proficiencies, I think
The fables concept is interesting. Add a 1/day spell with a saving throw based on the Fable, and I think you'll stay right in the cusp of meme
>>48031476
>>48031542
There's a Shaman homebrew around somewhere that uses the Warlock as a template iirc.
Wait. So how do you know how many magic slots you have?
>>48031644
The Vestige pact homebrew is the best for Shaman / Witch Doctor archetype that I've seen so far
>>48031646
you look at your class table, its pretty explicit. if you're multiclassed, you look at the multiclass table and read the rules for multiclassed casters. its also very explicit.
>>48031646
Spell slots are simply listed under your class advancement table. It isn't affected by casting ability.
Learning how D&D magic works for the first time, especially without someone there to do it, is a definite slog.
>>48031646
The class table featured in the class section of the PHB.
Elven Courtblade
>1d6 slashing
>Finesse, versatile (1d8)
>125 gp, 3lb.
Yes/no/OP?
Has anyone ever tried playing a Warforged Charlatan whose False Identity isn't a Warforged?
We were rolling abilities and of my players got
10, 13, 10, 14, 10, 14, he said that such stats were unplayable and asked to reroll I allowed him but it got me thinking with those stat it is really impossible to play ?
>>48031558
There is some cool stuff you can craft with a single day's downtime (8 hours) and 2.5gp:
-100 arrows or bolts
-250 blowgun needles
-1 hunting trap
-5000 (5 applications of) ball bearings
-1000 (5 applications of) caltrops
-10 feet of chain
-500 pieces of chalk
-1 grappling hook, 1 crowbar or 2 block and tackle kits, and 50ft of hempen rope (a little heist kit)
-a portable ram and a net (breach and apprehend kit)
-1 healer's kit
-500 feet of ladder
-50 oil flasks
-a vial of perfume
-100 darts (25lbs)
-500 sacks (250lbs)
-[2 sacks and 76 darts] + [1 sack and 23 darts]; use your mage hand legerdemain bonus action to out-turn a sack of darts over an enemy for 38d4 piercing damage. Only 19sp and a copper a time.
-250 bars of soap
-60 iron spikes (improvised daggers, tavern brawlers?)
-2 two-person tents and fishing tackle
-10 tinderboxes
-500 torches
Poison (100gp)
>20 days at 5gp per day
>10 days with 2 people
>5 days with 4 people
>1 day with 20 people
=====================
5 person party,
if all 5 have 3 retainers from the noble background and everyone has proficiency in the poisoner's kit, then they can all spend a day to make a single poison vial.
You can craft a set of fine clothes in 3 days worth of downtime.
-a portable ram and a crowbar (this breaks the 5gp market value rule by 1gp but you should be allowed to do it)
Poison (100gp)
20 days at 5gp per day
10 days with 2 people
5 days with 4 people
1 day with 20 people
=====================
5 person party.
if all 5 have 3 retainers, then they can all spend a day to make a single poison vial
>>48031800
Druid
>>48031800
My current "main group" started with ability scores around 8-12 at lvl 1. I think my array was 9, 11, 10, 11, 13, 9 - Wood Elf Druid.
We were perfectly fine, the DM even balances encounters so that they're always one level ahead of us (due to an unorthodox leveling system we use).
>>48031752
whatever
if your game needs it, fine.
>>48031800
Not really. With racial ASIs he gets one stat to 16. one of those 13s can become a 14. 8 levels away from a 20 in his main stat and all around decent other stats.
Your players a fag and so are you. Reminds me of the time a player rolled his stats 6 times until he got an 18 all in front of the DM with varying degrees of bullshit justification.
>>48031809
warlock
>>48031800
hes only 2 points below 27 point buy, and he can pick a race and get a 16 in some stat.
that said rolling is dumb and this is the risk you run so he should live with it.
>>48031831
It's always nice to have more options, especially since there's no 2h/versatile finesse weapons RAW.
>>48031857
>especially since there's no 2h/versatile finesse weapons RAW.
this is on purpose, but i also don't think it will break things as badly as some other members of our and other online 5e communities think.
2 handing is supposed to be one of the advantages of strength based characters. but people are going to do what they're going to do, so again i say whatever.elven courtblades are dumb though imo
>>48031843
Bard
>>48031897
The GWF style doesn't allow you to reroll dice other than those from the weapon anyway. It's been answered on twitter, at least, and it doesn't have the extra line that Critical Hits does about also working on additional sources of damage dice.
>>48031857
Sun Blade is a finesse versatile weapon. It allows Great Weapon Fighting style to work with Sneak Attack.
>>48031881
>2 handing is supposed to be one of the advantages of strength based characters
GWM is THE big advantage strength based characters get, and it requires a Heavy weapon. GWF is meh at best, only worth it for greatswords, and even then the +1 AC feature is probably going to see more use.
>>48031973
The twitter answer referred to Divine Smite. Sneak Attack RAW is weapon damage.
>>48031881
>elven courtblades are dumb though imo
Yeah? Dumber than Glaive/Halberd?:^)
>>48031846
Well I asked my group what they wanted to do, rolling, point buy or the average/median thing and this same exact guy managed to convince everyone to go with rolling.
>>48031991
Sneak Attack is the exact example that critical hits use as additional damage related to the attack.
>>48031644
If you mean the one that's got like 15 archetypes, no fucking thanks.
>>48032036
>his neckbear expected to roll 3 18s
he made his bed, now he has to bard in it
>>48032036
You should convince him to play a d6/d8 hit die class and that rolling for health is super good.
>>48032036
If you opt in for rolling that means you're stuck with whatever you get for better or worse. Otherwise you might as well just let people pick their own stats.
>>48032067
That leaves it ambiguous at best. Sneak Attack is the same damage type as the weapon that lands it, so there's room for interpretation either way until there's errata or a sage advice answer.
How can thieves even compare??
>>48024818
>his character doesn't have thick-ass gloves
This is how you spot someone who's not used to playing characters who can only hit things. Once they've played straight Fighters for years, they'll understand how important it is to specify exactly what kind of boots their character wears, and to put A FUCKING HELMET somewhere in their character's inventory.
>>48027169
Any DM with a brain isn't going to let you get away with that shit, and shouldn't.
And if you have a WACKY FUN DM, you don't need to be a Conjurer to do stupid shit like this anyway since he'll probably let you pull infinite bombs out of your ass or a backpack or some shit anyway.
>>48032156
>there's room for interpretation either way until there's errata or a sage advice answer.
http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/11/13/great-weapon-fighting-rerolling-smite-hex-and-hunters-mark/
http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/rules-answers-april-2016
I mean, we do literally know the intended interpretation. How much more do you want?
Is it just me or do EK fighters make better rangers than actual rangers
>>48032026
i don't even understand what you mean by this.
>>48031990
i'm just saying its one. i also said i don't think it really matters.
>>48032249
Dude, fighters, rogues, and bards make better rangers than rangers
>>48032271
>a versatile finesse weapon is dumber than having two EXACTLY IDENTICAL polearms
>>48032036
he sounds like a real asshat, especially in that case
>>48032036
Friends don't let friends roll for stats.
>rolling stats for new campaign
>one guy rolls four 1s
>three times
>ends up with 18, 16, 14, 3, 3, 3
>>48027219
they wont take damage until they explode, dont be dumb
>>48032293
i just think the name "elven courtblade" is stupid
>>48032359
>exploding is not damagingI don't actually
>>48032396*care though. my bad. if this was somehow important to a player I'd work it out with him.
>>48032351
Can sentient creatures even have an intelligence stat of 3?
>>48032416
You mean sapient.
>>48032290
thats because bards make better nearly everything than everything
>>48032351
So a 3 is -5 points, same as a 13 but the reverse, so lets count those 3 3s as -15 points.
18 lets rate at 19 points.
16 lets rate at 12 points.
14 is of course a 7.
38-15 = 23 points, not horrible.:^)rolling is dumb
>>48032247
Those are with spells though. Would be nice to get a confirmation on non-spells such as superiority dice, Sneak Attack, Colossus Slayer, etc.
>>48032359
Pretty sure setting things on fire usually damages them.
That said, if you want to consider the balance of allowing them to work or not, the modern grenades are too strong for level 2 but the more primitive bomb or even stick of dynamite is probably acceptable. It's two actions to deal 3d6 damage (Dex 12 negates/half). The issue is having one ready at the start of a fight is pretty strong at level 2.
