>All official WotC content here (now including the SCAG)
https://mega.nz#F!UVkTnT5b!FJ34UZ98BMY2mEtexenS7g
>Tools for 5e, other stuff, misc homebrews
http://pastebin.com/X1TFNxck
>SCAG Map:https://mega.nz/#!CowGWLKT!yiwaLeoLWcsV4d8uY5DmqsmPxTw3ZIdpz8xAzaYkQ5II
> November's UA (which should be in the Mega link above, but for those who just want it alone)
https://media.wizards.com/2015/downloads/dnd/02_UA_Underdark_Characters.pdf
Topic to start off the thread:
Is Sun Monk the best archetype to go for Monk, and does it push Monk from being just "ok" to actually good?
What's the stats on a buffalo? I'm making a barbarian who was raised by them.
Which Warlock pact boon is most shit, and why is it blade?
>>43550304
It's not that hard to fix.
>>43550304
Because it's only good for doing things a warlock shouldn't be doing.
Is there any multiclass build that actually makes it a good option?
>>43550362
Paladins run off of Charisma too, right?
>>43550225
I'd take the stats for Giant Elk then lower the HP, the chance to hit and the damage.
>>43550362
Blade Pact Palalock seems like the Logical multi option for this.
Honestly it's not impossible to make a tolerable bladelock with a finesse weapon, but it would definitely be a lot easier if Breastplate was an option.
So is the sun monk actually good at punching things with some utility? I'm currently in a 3.5 game playing a swordsage so I'm just curious. What does the sun monk offer that's new?
>>43550470
Sun monk can punch at range and gets AoE options. That's their shtick, which like the Four Elements monk kind of was but failed utterly at.
>>43550362
Undying Light Bladelock and Red/Gold/Brass Dragon Sorc. 12/8
Grab lifedrinker and a rapier, do 1d8 pierce + 3d8 fire +CHAx2 Fire + CHA Necrotic + DEX
Compared to Shillelock, it just comes down to whether you want more Sorcery Points for quickening or the bells and whistles from Warlock.
>>43550470
Have you ever wanted to punch people while shooting blasts of radiant energy and scream while you power yourself up?
>>43550503
>>43550535
So basically, they're super saiyans yah?
>>43549868
Long Death monk are better desu senpai
But Sun Soul monk are very fun and give a ranged option to the monk (I'm still waiting for the Zen Archer, WotC)
>>43549868
Deep stalker looks awesome. Now my Ranger won't be useless during this OotA campaign.
>>43550670
Most powerful ranger archetype. It's really nice.
>Party is level 7
>and two lvl 5 NPC's helping them
>send like 5 CR2 monsters against them
>at the end of the fight, one of the NPC's almost died, two players were heavily wounded, they spend all their spells in the fight and they didn't even get to kill all the enemies.
Goddamn i love 5e
>>43550362
Undying light bladelock + Greenflame blade is actually pretty gnarly once it gets lifedrinker and doesn't even need thirsting blade. Rapier GFB looks something like 1d8+Dex+Cha+2d8+Cha, and deals another 2d8+Cha+Cha to another adjacent foe.
Let's also not forget that the point of the bladelock is to be a switch-hitter, not a melee combatant. Now that we don't NEED to take Lifedrinker (or even really thirsting blade we can grab the other invokes that make EB so insane and just use those too.
Also easy to forget is what the bladelock can do for defensive measures and abilities that martial contemporaries simply can't, which is shit like Rebuke, Misty Step, Armor of Agathys, and the self-centered AOE spells that other casters don't really use because they don't bother to get that close.
>>43550470
>>43550503
>>43550535
>4e was shit for being too anime
>>43550766
Who are you quoting?
>>43550766
weebshit rules now baka desu senpai
>>43550766I also liked 4e
>>43550766
I never heard that one, mostly it was complaining it was too much like playing an MMO, with the 'powers' being the UI buttons.and no one knowing how to RP since the /emote command wasn't documented
>>43550766
>said no one ever
>>43550753
Though now that I think about it the bump in damage we're getting from bladelock at this point isn't quite so gnarly anyways, as a regular lightlock can pull this shit off with, say, a knife.
Or I suppose a tome lightlock could grab shillysham and just do everything with charisma.
Hmn.
>>43549868
could... could i get a link or copypaste of the Sun Soul monk stuff?
>>43550920
it all just stacks really well with a two level dip in paladin for smites, and paladin/warlock has a nice flavor
I think overall the pact of the blade doesn't need that much work to fix. I think the much bigger problem for warlocks is that most of the invocations are just really boring, and most of them aren't even useful.
>>43550957
I don't think there's a magic item in 5e called Sun Soul that is a Monk's staff. There's a PrC from 3.5 called Sun Soul, but maybe I missed it in my glance at the DMG.
>>43551183
Go to bed
>>43550957
It's in the mega link, SCAG book
>>43551221
Oh, he was asking for a link to the Sun Monk stuff as a whole, I mis-read stuff as staff, my bad.
>>43551246
I read it the same way.
>>43551022
Replace that one shitty mage armor one with CHA-based unarmoured defense.
Pact weapons can use their CHA to-hit.
Bam. Done.
>>43551615
>making a SAD class in 5e
>>>pfg
>>43551636
Maybe just not force them to roll for concentration if they're hit in melee?
>>43551615
I feel like there are a lot of ways to go about it. Using one of your options (probably not both together) goes about solving a lot of their issues. Making the extra attack invocation just a standard part of the blade pact at level 5 is another way to go about it.
I think they'd do really well with that class feature from the Witch Hunter that lets them load a spell into an attack (I feel like this would work well with EK too).
You could even do what an anon in a previous thread was doing. He created an invocation for the blade pact that lets a warlock summon armor and have proficiency in it while he's wearing it.
In my mind the overarching problem that's harder to fix is the lack of interesting, meaningful invocations in general. If something was done about that, warlock would be in a much better place.
Is Sharpshooter a good trait to pair with a variant human shortbow rogue or should I have taken Skulker?
>>43552127
Sharpshooter is great. Skulker is only useful when you miss and when it's dark
>>43552162
Yeah, I figured it was the best at early levels. Should I go for Skulker at 4? I dig hiding as a bonus action, and being able to do in it lightly obscured areas would be nice. Going for a stealth sniper sort of build.
I'd like to use a heavy crossbow in the end for best results. Something like Weapon Master for proficiency in HC > Sharpshooter > Skulker > Magic Initiate for Thaumatergy to douse torches and the like.
>>43549868
Monks are fine. They do sufficient DPR for a frontline fighter, and they have a solid bag of tricks available when damage isn't what you need.
If you thought they were meh, though, Sun doesn't give them anything four elements didn't already give them. Both are primarily about using magic for range and AoE, and neither is an obvious winner in terms of numeric damage. True, Radiant is generally better than elemental damage, but four elements gets battlefield control between wall of fire and the wind pushback thingy, which is much bigger than the damage type. Best Sun monk can say is that at 17th level it gets a nifty "don't touch me" ability.
Quick Question:
Do subraces grant both the base race's traits, or do they only grant their own traits?
Mainly I'm wondering about the ability score adjustments, because there is nothing stating against the former which is what I'm used to.
>>43552935
Yes, subraces are an addition to the base trait, not a full replacement.
>>43552948
Thanks, brah.
It was possible for sorcerers to relearn spells in older editions by drinking Dragon Blood right?
A player sorcerer is planning on undergoing the ritual to become a Dragonborn of Bahamut, and, mechanically, would need to change all their spells from Fire to Cold.
>>43553021
If you're the DM, just say that all their fire spells now deal cold damage. Bam. Done.
>>43553021
Bear in mind that, balance wise, fire spells do a lot more damage than cold spells because so much shit is resistant or immune to fire damage, so you might want to think about lowering the damage of the changed fire spells if you do that.
>consider the following.jpg
Advantages and Disadvantages can be stacked
>>43553773
Pointless.
>>43553773
>Why can't I hold all these d20s.
>>43550730
Some players don't know that aiding each other to give advantage to the stronger characters is a chance not only to raise the odds of high damage, but a chance to roleplay.
Do smites crit?
>>43553925
Wait, you mean something matters other than topping the Omen DPS Meter?
>>43552467
4elements charges for EVERYTHING and overcharges for it at that. Sun soul gives repeatable ranged attacks that cost no ki unless you want to make four attacks.
Not to mention the spells they get that are far more appropriately costed than the 4elements bullshit.
>>43553773
Should be allowed.
If i prepare to have three legitimate sources of advantage, i should get to roll four times and take the best of those rolls. If i prepare two disadvantages against an enemy, they should have to take worst of three. And its retarded how one disadvantage can cancel out a hundred advantages.
>>43553940
I will often just place myself tactically to provide Combat Advantage, and take a dodge action.
>>43553935
yes
>>43553993
WotC probably had thought of it, but then quickly figured out that players would explain the most inane bullshit to get just one more advantage.
>>43554068
Yeah, it was supposed to be a streamlined way to encourage roleplaying through mechanics, letting it stack would result in arguments for 15 minutes about how that maneuver the player just explained should give him FIVE Advantages.
>>43552293
Ok enjoy having 16 dex forever
>>43553014
Try reading PHB next time, super dumbass
>>43554142
God some players are bad enough for that as it is.
>>43553773
I think there can be an even middle ground where advantage and disadvantage stack, but not in the same way.
So lets say you have advantage twice from two different effects, but disadvantage from one enemy effect. The net total would be a single advantage. Basically you can stack as many advantages or disadvantages on either side, but only the higher side gains the benefit.
ex. The player attacks and has three separate effects that grant advantage. The defending enemy only has a single effect that imposes disadvantage. The PC has the higher total, thus granting them a SINGLE advantage roll against the enemy.
>>43554393
He can still get a 20 dex actually, since rogues get 6 ASI. 4 feats and 2 ASI may not be ideal but is definitely viable.
What about making achieving additional layers of advantage required exponentially more reasons for advantage. Like the basic 1 reason for advantage, 2 reasons on top of the 1st for 2, and so on? In addition, tell the player that if any of the reasons are unsatisfactory, they lose advantage altogether.
So, even though we're in 5e now, and correct me if I'm retarded, but I'm pretty sure this isn't a thing anymore: I'm thinking of making it so when my players reach significant milestones in their character, they have to do small-medium sized quests to unlock the parts of their class that come with the level. For example, a Wizard getting their tradition at 3. Unless the players are dicks, they'll obviously help each other with each person's sidequest, I'm hoping it'll fluff up their characters and relationships between the party a bit more. Is it too much to ask for something that really should just come with the level though?
Id ask them but I don't want to spoil that before they make their characters
>>43554694
Just make the actual leveling require some sort of event. Training isn't exactly unheard of and is written in as part of the downtime rules.
>>43554724
Well I still want them to have the other benefits of the level upon getting the required exp, and I especially don't want to do this on every level.
Playing as a Pally it's weird trying to act as a voice of reason in a room of murder hobos
>>43555275
Just pretend you're a psychiatric nurse and they're your crazies.
>>43555275
That's literally all paladins everywhere.
Welcome to the cloughb, bro.
>>43554764
Are all the players leveling up simultaneously? You could RP it as x weeks of downtime, everyone tells at the start of the session how they unlockes their new abilities. Like a "what have you been up to" storytime instead of having to play out everyone's quest in full
>>43554694
What exactly are you worried about spoiling? This seems like something you should really talk to your players about.
>>43550431
Are there stats for thunderbeast or some form of bison? It's a common animal.
>play a caster
>level up
>spontaneously learn a ton of new spells overnight
>immediately know how they all work
Feels good.
>>43555798
>>43553695
Cold resistance and immunity isn't far behind fire. Cold spells deal less damage when they also have other effects, like slowing or creating difficupt terrain.
>>43553981
Like burning hands for 2 ki, instead of 2 ki? The radiant bolts cost you damage until level 11, and stunning strikes. The radiant fireball is save negates, so it averages much less damage than a real one. The capstone is then nothing special for your low hp ranged attacker.
4ele's abilities aren't overcosted, but just too narrow in utility and too few are learned. Some of the options are even outright bad. 4 'spells' and a cantrip could be passable if they had class features, or else more spells known so one of them is more likely to be useful.
How do you guys fluff hits and hp loss in general, /tg/? Is every mechanical hit an in-game hit? Do they all cause wounds? How do you consolidate that with healing to 100% from a long rest?
I feel like there's a bit of a disconnect here that could easily be solved by proper fluffing and calling in-game.
Hey 5eg, I need a thematic magical item to give to a level 5 moon druid in the game I run.
How would you build an archer focusing on trick arrows?
>>43556279
Battlemaster Fighter. Can trip and do other effects with your arrows.
>>43556279
Battle Master. Refluff maneuvers into trick arrows
>Disarming Arrow
>Tripping Arrow
Yadda yadda
>>43556171
>Is every mechanical hit an in-game hit? Do they all cause wounds?
Yes and yes.
How do you consolidate that with healing to 100% from a long rest?
Don't think about it.
>>43556307
>>43556309
but can you do boxing glove arrows?
>>43556349
Menacing Arrow. Duh
>>43556349
Boxing Glove Arrows=Non lethal damage
>>43554142
So a more reasonable number, like 3 advantages max? Beyond that it gets silly with the number of dice rolls
>>43556360
>Fire an arrow with a boxing glove on the end
>Hits a guy in the chest
>He stares at it
>Then stares up at the archer
>Transfixed horror slowly comes across his face
>He breaks into a run, screaming
>This happens on everyone you hit with this
>>43556417
Alternatively
>mark your glove(s) with a big warning label
>target doesn't know what kind of deadly poisonous gas or vicious explosive powder you loaded the boxing glove with
>is afraid to get closer and find out what else you have in that weird ass quiver of yours
>>43556261
well what's his theme
So I made a hombrew class. Whats the best method to make it look oh so pretty a la PHB/Hombrew Handbook?
>>43556518
Check the OP homebrew link, the resources are in it.
>>43553935
>>43554045
>>43556558
The melee damage from the weapon can crit. The damage from smite cannot.
>>43556580
www sageadvice.eu/2014/11/06/double-dice-on-critical/
>Any dice that are part of an attack's damage are rolled again on a crit.
>>43556607
>>43556607
Correct. This even goes for hex / hunters mark damage. Crits in 5e are awesome, unless you roll stupid low damage like I do.
>>43556513
Not much beyond typical Druidy stuff.
>>43556261
I want to make a joke about a Staff of Moonfire Spam but I can't figure out how to do that in 5e. Staff that while equipped lets you cast Magic Missile as a level 1 Wizard and makes an annoying noise?
the prince is actully a slaad under a true polymorph curse/spell
the only way to turn him back is an act/kiss of true hate
>play wizard
>can't remember any of my spells
>spend my turns flipping through the phb for spell description
>party members get mad at me
It's not my fault there are so many fucking spells
>>43556711
Print out some spell cards bruh.
>>43556711
Make up some little cue cards with just enough info on them (like name, damage dice, save DC, etc) to get you by.
>>43556711
Pretty sure there's some tools in one of the OP pastebins that give you a list of spells, and you can select the ones you have and print em out.
>>43556261
Blissful Sentinel (shapechanger) Silvered scimitar +1.
>>43556171
A "hit" in game terms is an attack which diminishes the enemies defensive capabilities.
If your enemy is still above 0 HP he deflected/dodged the blow but you grazed him/he gets exhausted/strained a muscle/etc.
If you reduce somebody to 0 HP your blow connects directly and strikes a possibly mortal wound. Your enemy was too tuckered out to evade the killing blow.
>>43556771
5e also describes HP as: "...a combination of physical and mental durability. The will to live, and luck."
HP are basically "what makes sense" in the given context.
>>43555944
Not really. Cold is resisted by more things and tends to get bigger AOE up until meteor swarm
>>43556171
The only way to work it and not drive yourself to madness is just go with whatever makes the most sense.
Some hits might actually be a hit, some might be a near miss, some might be a bizarre quantum-hit that occurred to facilitate an on-hit effect that couldn't logically trigger without the blow landing but simultaneously didn't occur because the wound has to heal to full in eight hours of nap-time.
Long story short, just don't think about it. If you want a system that even vaguely models what happens when a bunch of goblins savage you with their rusty saw blades then you aren't looking for D&D, because the system isn't built to handle any health-effect states besides "you're fine bro" and "HOLY SHIT YOU'RE BLEEDING TO DEATH BRO".
>>43556580
RTFM, family
>>43556711
>It's not my fault I'm dumb and I do shit to fix this
Actually it's
>>43556711
No, it's totally your fault. Grab a fucking pencil and scribble out your spells onto some cards beforehand, you lazy fuck. Or print them out, if that's less effort for your lazy ass.
>>43557547
Or buy the 5e spell cards. Or get the free app. I pref pencil and paper but my players use a lot of apps for character sheets and such.
>>43549868
Sorry, anon, sun monk is still ok
Fuck, their fireball literally does nothing if the target passes the DC
>>43553981
Their free bolt deals 1d4+dex damage within 30 feet. I can spend 1 silver on a sling which does the same thing. (Or, better, buy a shortbow for almost 3 times the basic range and the ability to take disadvantage to go up to 320 feet.)
>>43557815
You can't deal 1d10+Dex with slings or shortbows though.
You can't also attack 4 times with them.
You can't deal non piercing/bludgeoning/slashing damage with them
Is warlock combat basically just spamming a shitload of Eldritch Blasts and saving your spell slots for rare situations where you need something else?
>>43557849
Yep. Fun, right?
>>43557849
Not too bad if your DM allows for a couple of short rests. Still not the same spell selection as a wizard but you have really consistent damage with EB and some utility with invocations+boon.
https://www.heroforge.com/load_config=426690
Vengeance Oath paladin that suffers from mild ptsd.
>>43557853
Almost as much fun as playing a Champion!
>>43555295
>>43555356
Thanks, THIS IS the model I'm going to buy to rep said character
https://www.heroforge.com/load_config=426690
>Vengeance Oath paladin that suffers from mild PTSD.
>>43557998
Yeah, champion is awfully boring too, that's why if I play fighter I go EK or BM.
Barb can be boring too.
Would a good long-term build be Warlock 17/Sorcerer 3?
If so, when would be a good time to take warlock levels?
>>43558317
Warlock 3/Sorcerer 17 is more common, what is it about the upper levels of Warlock that appeals to you?
>>43558349
I dunno, just spitballing here. The party's still at level 1 so we've got a long way to go.
>>43558063
>>43557998
>DM's wife 'plays' with us
>Every single character she makes is an Elf Champion fighter with Ranged fighting style and a longbow.
Champions aren't meant to be fun, they're the Girlfriend Option for people who don't want to be involved with the game beyond rolling for initiative, to-hit, and damage.
>>43558372
Honestly, I don't think the Warlock has much going for it in the long run, so any dips into it I'd keep at a minimum.
>>43557834
Yes you can. Slings and shortcuts are simple weapons so they scale with martial arts die
>>43557998
I feel it really depends on the player and how they treat their character. I'm playing a Barbarian and he is the most fun I've had in 5e so far. I rp hard with him and ended up being the stoic leader of the group
>>43558395
Figures. 3 levels gets you the book, which is pretty much the only reason to do so, right? Then just shotgun Sorcerer the rest of the way?
>>43558441
>Slings and shortcuts are simple weapons so they scale with martial arts die
RTFM, family
>>43558441
Ok first we will look at where it mentions damage scaling.
>You can roll a d4 in place of the normal damage of your unarmed strike or monk weapon. This die changes as you gain monk levels, as shown in the Martial Arts column of the Monk table
OK so what weapons ARE monk weapons?
>At 1st level, your practice of martial arts gives you mastery of combat styles that use unarmed strikes and monk w eapons, which are shortswords and any simple melee weapons that don’t have the two-handed or heavy property.
>Simple Melee weapons
>Melee weapons
>MELEE
There you go.
>>43558441
Only monk weapons scale with martial arts damage, Slings and Shorbows AREN'T monk weapons.
>Start game
>Roll character with lucky feat
>GM rolls behind a screen
Damn
>Enemy attacks me "Are you going to use one of your lucky uses?"
>Me "Can I see what he rolled?"
>GM "Hehehe, no"
>Me "Mmm, okay, then no?"
>GM "Cool, it was a crit"
>Later
>GM "Are you going to use one of your lucky uses?"
>Me "Yes?"
>GM rerolls "Thanks, another crit"
Screens should be forbidden
>>43558574
Can you throw any monk weapon using Dex?
>>43558744
No, unless it has thrown property
>>43558735
I've seen a few stories like this. Looking over Lucky, the part about rerolling an opponent's roll doesn't have the same restriction (before determination) as the first part of the ability. So, even if a DM won't tell you the exact number, it seems to me that you can opt to have the DM tell you whether the roll is a hit or a miss before your decide to use the Luck point. At least, that's my interpretation.
>>43558735
Your DM is a dick.
Also:
>You can also spend one luck point when an attack roll is made against you. RolI a d20, and then choose whether the attack uses the attacker's roll or yours.
You make the luck roll, always, not your DM.
>>43558744
I think you might be able to.
>If a character uses a ranged weapon to make a melee attack, or throws a melee weapon that does not have the thrown property, it also deals 1d4 damage. An improvised thrown weapon has a normal range of 20 feet and a long range of 60 feet.
This shows you can throw melee weapons, and the monk rules state you can use Dex for your monk weapon attacks. However, you would still deal 1d4 damage as described in the improvised weapon rules, as that replacement effect is more specific. The improvised thrown weapon rules do not mention Str or Dex, so the monk rules would apply. As such, any thrown monk weapon (without the thrown property) would use Dex for the attack roll, deal 1d4 + Dex, and have a range of 20/60.
>>43554694
Wizards get their traditions at 2, and progress from 1-3 is supposed to be very quick. It's unlikely you'll have enough time for side questing for a character's class stuff, let alone everyone's. While I do like the idea and did something similar in 4e for people's paragon paths, those came at 10 and were more geared towards such rite of passages. It'd be more apt to do for prestige classes.
>>43557834
>d10
Fair enough, though the difference between d6 and d10 is like 2 points of damage on average. In any case, still not enough to tip me when compared to battlefield control utility. 30ft range is pretty limiting.
>Attack 4 times
At that point you're using ki, and four elements has water whip for similar effect. Deals more damage at most levels (all levels if you're willing to spend the third ki for a flurry), costs more ki, but brings them within melee range. Not clearly better or worse, but certainly comparable.
>Non piercing/bludgeoning/slashing
I wouldn't call that a feature. Magic p/b/s are probably the best damage types in the game, and while radiant is definitely better than fire you're not going to be happy when an Angel looks at your wicked murderhoboing soul.
Again, though, the point is that Four Eles can do most of the same stuff, and also can knock the big bad into the spike growth or plant growth or stinking cloud or pit or whatever piece of bad stuff your party has conjured/found. With good tactics, that's worth a lot more than the few points of damage sun monk gains at certain levels of ki usage and certain distances from the enemy. (Also, as has been pointed out, sun monk's AoE is save for-all instead of save-for-half, which *really* sucks.)
>>43556171
Read Ravenloft core. Lots of interesting things there.
>>43558832
I'm pretty sure a class feature is more specific than the general improvised weapons rules.
>>43558948
1 ki point for 4d10+20 is better than 1 ki point for 3d10, better than 2 ki points for 4d10 and better than 3 ki points for 5d10.
Water whip can knock prone or pull though, that's kinda ok, but as an action is not.
>Angels
If you're going to be an evil monk, be a long death or a shadow one, dude, you have to keep the stereotypes, otherwise this is chaos.
The non save-for-half has to be a mistake, waiting for errata. Though wotc is prone to fuck up shit because they love to fuck up shit, look shadow monks not being able to see through their own darkness but shadow sorcerers and warlocks do.
>>43558735
Your DM is a giant cunt. It's clear the intent of lucky is that you know the number of the roll but not the result. House rules are fine, but if they negatively affect the players they need to either be up front or between sessions with the opportunity to swap out affected abilities.
Also crits should always be revealed. You screen so you can fudge in favor of the players, not against them.
(That said I ban lucky in my games because it's a little too good even without the disadvantage glitch, and an outright ban is cleaner and easier than patching the disadvantage glitch.)
>>43559056
That feat depends on the number of encounters per day, if you use the 6-8 like the game recommends, Lucky is ok, there're so many rolls involved that 3 rerolls don't matter much.
The less encounters, the less rolls and resources spent, then Lucky becomes great.
>>43559012
Water whip is a bonus action. You get to make a melee attack when you're done. It's 2 ki for 5d10+10, or 3 ki to add flurry to your melee for 7d10+20 (you could also pump the whip, but as you point out that's pretty shitty). Keep in mind this is also at level 17+, which is when the comparison most favors Sun. Level 3 and 4 are clearly in Ele's favor, and at Level 5-11 you're looking at 4d6+20 (avg 34) vs 2d6+10+3d10 (avg 33.5). Generally speaking sun monk will do more at low levels of ki usage, but elemental has the ability to Nova better. And again, this is in the specific case where you can get to within 30 feet but can't get to them in melee.
>Angels only go after evil characters
Maybe in your games. Between wizards binding outsiders and good old means-versus-ends conflicts, I usually end up fighting an angel or two. Not nearly as common as undead or demons, which is why radiant is a good damage type, but magic pbs is still preferable imo.
>>43559190
Water Whip (p. 81).
This discipline re-quires an action, not a bonus action
read the erratta bitch
>>43559190
>Water whip is a bonus action
Oh, man, good one, I really needed it
>>43559190
Sorry friend, Water Whip got errata'd.
>>43559210
It still baffles me why they felt the need to gimp the fucking monk in errata
>>43559260
not every monk either. Just the weakest subclass.
It always makes me laugh.
So I've been thinking for a longer time about making a tank based halfling barbarian. Now recently someone I know wants to do a colosseum style thing with 11th level characters doing one on one battles against each other.
So my idea is a halfling starting as barbarian with most points in dex and con, levelling up the barbarian to atleast level 4, so we can take bear feature from totem warrior. Also defensive duelist as we will be using a finesse weapon. Then we dip into rogue for damage, mobility and more defense. There would be 2 options, either assassin to get crits from surprise attacks or swashbuckler to always have sneak attacks in melee. As there isn't really much advantage from level 5 rogue over level 7, we can go barbarian 6/ rogue 5.
Reckless attack can be used to get sneak attacks when going with assassin and with decent dex and con we can increase AC to around 24 when using a shield with defensive duelist.
So what does /tg/ think? This is only a rough idea so far though.
How's Witch Hunter?
>>43550515
>>43550753
> implying UA options are universally asked allowed
>>43559296
Homebrew so it's irrelevant.
>DM starts running a campaign he's been working on for months. Big open world, warring factions, intrigue, and the party is caught in the middle of it. Players are hyped as fuck
>First session. Lots of exposition. Characters introduce each other. Little combat. Awesome.
>Second session. Players are forced to join caravan. Goodbye open world.
>Introduce new faction, they need us to storm an enemy stronghold. >Investigate and find that it was already stormed.
>Chaotic characters search already looted bodies.
>Just find a few clues for the BBEG's plan or something. Introduce another new faction to escort us back.
>Only fight off some wolves from camp the previous night.
I'm all for roleplaying and stuff, but I rolled a paladin, not a civilian. At this rate I'm not going to reach level 2 until 4th session. I should have made a CE character to just start fights when I wanted them.
can anyone help me think of a reasonable background to provide my human wizard with perception and stealth?
>>43559352
I'm fairly sure that the skills gained from backgrounds are largely malleable.
>>43559331
>being a passive agressive shitheel
Just man up and talk with the DM about encounter frequency
GFB doesn't actually use your spell attack bonus right? Just your regular melee attack?
>>43559148
Two points:
1) It's not always easy to get 6-8 encounters in per day. Random encounters in the middle of travel time skips, investigation plotlines where the PCs are mostly running around talking to people, etc. Sometimes it doesn't make narrative sense for the PCs to have that many fights in a day. Sure you can shoehorn, but you don't really want to. (Obviously 6-8 is easy in a dungeon crawl.)
2) Only 5% of rolls are going to be crit threats. Assuming an average of 4 rounds per encounter, 7 encounters per day, and 3 attacks per round, you're looking at about 4 crits per day. Assuming they're not all pointed at you, you're effectively immune to critical hits. That's the worst case scenario, too -- you'll commonly see them ending encounters a round early by flipping a miss into a killing blow, or ensuring they save against whatever nasty 1/day thing the boss has. You might have a lot of rolls with a standard day, but they get to choose the ones that matter the most. It's a lot for a single feat.
>>43559352
Why do you want perception and stealth?
Can familiars perform the help action on their turn?
>>43559366
oh, i was under the impression that you either picked one of the premade backgrounds, or created your own unique one
>>43559424
i want a cautious, wary, safe wizard, so being stealthy and perceptive are natural fits. i'll have 16 DEX as well to make use of the stealth
>>43559352
You learned magic by sneaking into the nearby Wizard's College and listening in on lessons.
>>43559488
Yes, and that's usually their primary function in combat.
>>43559540
thanks a lot, that's so simple i don't know why i couldn't think of it. all i could come up with was something convoluted involving getting kidnapped by drow
Does anyone have that one anon's PDF where he tweaked the four non-Wot4E monk traditions to make each one associated with a different element? I'm considering playing a monk with an elemental theme, but don't want to be Wot4E, and I'm kicking myself for not saving it when he posted it.
>>43559375
Correct
>>43557998
>>43557853
>>43557849
Warlocks and champions are both for players who are either new, not completely playing attention, or focused more on the story. Which is an important thing that keeps game groups together. I recently brought on two new players who are playing a champion and a tomelock, and it's exactly as much as they can handle for now. The champion in particular is only barely getting it - the complexity of a spellcaster or even a battlemaster might scare him away at this point.
>>43559766
I can understand a dull subclass, but a dull full class is just fucking stupid.
>>43559822
Why? It gives even the really new or really slow the option to play a spellcaster instead of a martial. A battlemaster is about as complex as a warlock, while a champion is even simpler. Fighter and warlock are both pretty dull classes by design, and it works. People who want more complexity can play something else.
>>43559910
>Why?
Because a full class fucks those who want to play a warlock, while a subclass can be pretty much avoided.
You can be a fighter without being a champion, but you can't be a warlock without being a warlock.
Full classes made stupid on purpose is stupid.
>>43559397
6-8 encounters per day is actually high, because it was written before the final encounter xp guidelines. Now it's 4-6 medium to hard encounters really. 3 attacks per round is a little low for a whole battle, but about right for what a tank might see. In a day with 20 rounds, lucky effects one roll in 15% of the rounds. That's nothing.
It's not hard to throw a decent number of encounters at a party, even during investigations, if that's what you want. Incident1, investigation, red herring2, escalation3, and resolution4. Through in a subboss and you're at 5.
>>43559822
Warlock really isn't that boring
Yeah in combat they tend to be rather 2 dimensional with EB spam but a Tomelock can be really useful for a lot of groups and a Chainlock can be fun to play.
The Bladelock leaves something to be desired.
The main problem is that people think of the warlock as a wizard replacement and he definitely isn't. The Warlock is an archer replacement.
>>43559910
Then people who want more complexity but want fighter/warlock flavor are out of luck
>>43559310
You're fucking irrelevant.
>>43559975
Honestly, the only classes that have 10/10 out of combat utility are the ritualists and the skill monkeys, Tomelock has the potential to be both, Lock in general can be one of the skill monkey casters, and if you're ready to make that sacrifice, even martials can pick up a little book of secrets.
>>43550830
4e was built off of the ideas in 3.5's Book of Nine Swords, aka Book of Weeaboo Fightan Magic.
So, when, as a Warlock, you Hex someone... do they know they're Hexed?
I mean, can I Hex someone's Wis checks so they suck at Insight? Then lie to them a lot?
>>43560153
The spell doesn't specify it, so unless you do it to their face they might, at most, feel a little under the weather.
>>43560153
It's up to the DM. Usually people know when they're under the influence of a spell unless it says otherwise. At the very least they'll see and hear you cast a spell if it has somatic or verbal components. You can't whisper verbal components at less than a strong speaking voice.
>>43559962
You're still focused on counting # of rolls it affects and not what it's actually doing. Some rolls matter a lot more than others. Lucky gives you insurance on those rolls, which significantly reduces the PC's danger level.
All this talk of how much bladelocks suck is making me bummed out about the bladelock I've been creating for my next campaign.
>>43560475
MC paladin
>>43560475
Bladelocks do not suck. They are just inferior to tomelocks. Pick your first level as Fighter for Heavy Armor proficiency, so you can use STR weapons without going MAD.
>>43560475
Dex Bladelock only requires three stats to be okay (same as every class), and with invocations you can have a skillset as broad as a Rogue. It's just that Tome tends to be rated highly more because of the rituals than Shillelagh (which is overrated)
>>43560475
There's a lot I don't like about Bladelocks, but they do have some advantages. You'll always have a magic weapon at hand. The party might not always get the magic weapons they want, but you will always be able to summon whatever you need, when you need it. Can't quite reach after your move? That's okay, your pact weapon is now a whip or a pike or even a trident. Need some damage? Bam, now you've got a great axe or a great sword. Pick up a short sword and you can TWF on the fly.
Really, the Bladelock will become better with more weapons in the game.
How are blade singers? I was thinking of rolling one up for the next campaign I'll play.
>>43560534
Pretty good except for the hit dice.
>>43560516
>Shillelagh (which is overrated)
Add GFB there and you outdamage any dex bladelock
>inb4 "b-b-but bladelock can also p-pick GFB!"
Yeah, making thirsting blade useless, and if you aren't going to pick the bladelock invocations why did you go bladelock in the first place?
>>43560596
>look I do one more point of damage than you every minute, I am master cheese
>>43559766
Between finding uses for repelling blast, at will silent image, active patron features, and actual spells, there's plenty to as a warlock besides blast spam. Your total spells / day aren't even that bad once you get a few short rests in, biggest issue is you can't hold and nova the way normal casters can. Plus, as has been mentioned, tomelock's book of a million rituals gives you a ton of utility out of combat. They're definitely a class that can be played by the girlfriend without much problem, but if you're looking for more than blast spam it's there.
>>43560475
Bladelock isn't actually that bad. Armor of Agathys can do stupid levels of damage once enemies start multiattacking, and your AC is fine as long as you stick dex based. You're a bit more one-trick ponyish than book and chain since you'll want to keep Armor up all the time, but you've still got utility invocations and eldritch blast backup plans when you can't get into melee range.
>>43560596
Couldn't a dex bladelock just pick GFB and do the same thing? They'd get more damage too from lifedrinker
>>43560694
You're not allowed to do both, sorry, so have decreed the Tomewanks
>>43560596
>Assuming everyone is playing in Faerun
I, for one, have no interest in visiting R.A. Salvatore's magical realm.
How do I roleplay my druid better? I was going for this sort of desert sage vibe. However.. I am finding that all the spells that fit this are kind of crappy. Like dust devil is my favorite spell but its pretty garbo mechanically. So much possibility for friendly fire.
Also, the druid "RP" cantrips are total crap. Druidcraft is relatively pointless. No where NEAR as useful as presdigitation.
Anyone have any advice? I feel like I use the same spells over and over. Also, I feel shoe horned into taking the war caster feat for advantage on concentration checks. The druid has SO MANY IMPORTANT CONCENTRATION CHECKS! and shitty cantrips.
>>43560760
YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE MECHANICALLY PERFECT
I swear if the mentality was the same with 2e as it turned after 3.5, the only thing people would ever play is Dart GM fighters.
>>43560596
>>inb4 "b-b-but bladelock can also p-pick GFB!"
Because nobody anywhere has ever changed anything about their build because of new content being released. You can still take lifedrinker, it works well with GFB.
Did a bladelock player fuck your mum or something?
>>43559980
this should have been the distinction between barbs and fighters. barbarians simple, fighters complex. similar enough in flavour that people who want a simple fighter can play a slightly refluffed barbarian or vice versa. having simple barbs and simple fighters is pointless, might as well have just rolled the barbarian into the fighter as a subclass.
>>43560760
Play a Moon Druid instead.
>>43560760
>Cast Dust Devil at enemy archers/mages
>Watch as they have disadvantage from the obscured area
Seems like a pretty good spell to me man.
I am with you as far as Druid variety goes. Early level spells are kind of lacking.
>>43560800
I understand I don't have to be perfect but its hard to be credit to the team when you are using crap spells. I am trying to figure out how to fluff my character better as well. Druids seem so restrictive with their fluff. Everything IS BALANCE! I just want to roleplay as a wise desert sage who uses mostly earth and desert styled spells.
>>43560760
Use Conjure Animals to make desert versions of the list in the MM -- your DM shouldn't have a problem with you saying it's a giant bobcat instead of a tiger. Take spells like spike growth and stone shape. Realize it's okay for a desert druid to have entangle and plant growth -- lots of species of cactus have shallow, wide root networks. Talk about home when it's appropriate -- RP is much more about what your character says than what actions they take in combat.
Also, >>43560800
>>43560854
>then they just move out of the 10 feet of obscured area and shoot you anyway
I understand what you mean though.
Is magic stone a good cantrip because that is what I took? I like the idea of slinging stones that deal pretty decent damage. I use a sling too.
>>43560844
I already picked land druid and we are level 4 now. Our DM said that after level 4, no character changes can be done unless death happens in which case you re roll :(
I didn't realized how gimped the transformation for land druids is compared to moon druid. What is even the advantage of picking land druid? the bonus spells seem crap.
>>43560836
The barb is simple but he's a slight step up from the Champion. Champion is for the truly braindead. Barb has a fair bit of risk/reward built into his design. Rage is good, berserker's frenzy moreso, but it's limited and frenzy comes with a steep cost. Reckless attack too, advantage is huge especially with your features that key off of crits but it comes with the risk that your guaranteed hit is also an increase in the potential for you to get utterly gangraped by enemies.
Barb and monk are good "next steps" for inexperienced players, teaching them resource management for occasional boosts while also being capable without spending their resources. So no, I don't agree that cutting out the champion and replacing it with the barbarian would be a good idea.
>>43560877
In the case of theme, you really have to get you're DM to let you refluff things.
>>43560912
The bonus spells. As you said, they are crap. Land Druid is unbalanced. There's quite a few subclasses that are straight inferior to their alternatives.
>>43560912
I play a Druid in my Wednesday night games. Magic Stone and Shillelagh have been my bread and butter, and will probably remain that way until I hit level 5, which shouldn't take too long. It does decent damage and allows you to be armed pretty much all the time.
>Carry around a bag of rocks
>Captured by racist guards
>"Why do you have a bag of rocks with you?"
>"I am just a poor, uncivilized man from the forest sir, they are like currency/good luck charms/religious symbols to me."
>Whatever, you can keep your damn rocks
>Or just pick up a rock in your cell, break off a piece of the wall, whatever
I think it's handy.
>>43560912
>What is even the advantage of picking land druid? the bonus spells seem crap.
Ability to cast spells over again if your concentration breaks the first time. Otherwise nothing really. Once you hit level 5 >>43560897 has the right idea, sick minions on them. Also be sure to wear medium armour and a shield to give you the AC buff you need.
>>43560694
>>43560711
>>43560817
>Entire pact reduced to "life drinker"
I prefer to rise Cha earlier, still have feats for lot of shit (you need to rise Dex up to 20 too), and have tons of rituals.
Also you're still on warlock's framework, d8, light armored and 0 skirmishing abilities. I literally lose nothing (only two cantrips), a tome lock being as good as a bladelock in combat is just coincidential, you need to focus on that and unless you go full PM/GWM/Palaind MAD you're just as good as tomelock, isn't that sad?
Also you cast your weapon as an action, tomelock casts his as bonus action (shillelagh). Not that it matters, just another nail on the coffin.
Bladelock? bladelock was a mistake.
>>43560912
Land Druid is the classic, old school caster/scimitar-wielding druid. The bonus spells are a nice thing desu.
Also I agree with >>43560897, in a lot of cases refluffing might work and there is definitely a lot of things a desert druid could do. Hell, some utility spells like create water are probably sensible, visual illusions, thunder and fire spells make sense for a desert, and heat metal is a god-tier damage spell.
>>43560985
This is my main problem, unless I go crazy and I invest everything on MC, feats, etc to make a meh bladelock, tomelock seems a no brainer, srly, zero invesment while still being as good as my bladelock, that's not fair.
>>43560992
Hasn't druid always been built around wildshape?
>>43560974
I have magic stone but not shilielagh. I don't find myself in melee too often but I can see how it would come in handy.
So many of the fun spells are concentration. I wouldn't mind using flame blade.. but its concentration...
Do you feel pidgeon holed into taking war caster as a druid? I wondering how others feel about this.
>>43561053
>Shillelagh
>Flame blade
>Concentration
Wut??? neither of those are concentration spells, anon.
>>43561018
errrrrrrrrrr no
The reason wild shape was so overpowered in 3.5 is that it was never, ever playtested. Because the people who played druids in the playtest were still playing AD&D scimitar-and-board druids.
>>43560943
i don't think the game needs classes or subclasses that are "braindead" from 1-20. even if you are a new player, you want something that *starts* simple and then grows more complicated as you level up. that's how a learning curve works. if necessary just rearrange some of the barbarian's abilities so they get reckless attack a few levels later, they are otherwise pretty durable which is the main concern for new players.
>>43561018
Not as much as it is in 5e, the whole cocking class is geared towards it. Which is why land is straight hot garbage compared to Moon.
>>43561075
Flame Blade is. Read the PHB anon.
>>43560912
>Bonus for land druid
Natural recovery is the big one. More spells per day and all that. Nature's sanctuary is also god-tier concentration protection when you finally do get it. Lot of the circle spells are meh, but most all circles have something decent, especially if you like having situational spells available whenever you need them at basically no cost. (Desert druid always having silence ready *will* help you out at some point if you keep it in mind, and when you get to 9th level, and wall of stone is fantastic.)
Also, it's worth mentioning that combat wild shape is overrated. It's a giant stack of hit points, but you can't cast while wild shaped and you do mediocre damage outside of the level 2-4 window.
>>43561107
I think you underestimate how much hand-holding some people need. Plus most player's first campaigns will end before they get their third attack on the fighter anyway.
>>43561119
Sorry, thought you were talking about Green Flame Blade.
Anyway, that "problem" has it absolutely any Gish or Caster that wants to go on melee in 5e, druid is not the only one.
>>43561119
The class is even less wildshape focused in 5e than it was in 3.5 and 4, the only way you could argue it was is if you've literally only played those and think Druid is the Diablo/WoW druid.
Yes you could make a functional sword and board druid in 3e (hell, I went full gimp in NWN2 and had the druid companion go dual finesse scimitars just for the giggles), but you were gimping yourself.
>>43561053
Not really, no. Like I said, I've been using magic stone and shillelagh, so no need for concentration yet. Once I hit level 5, I'm just not going to use a weapon at all. Shield in one hand, arcane focus in the other.
So I want to play a moon druid that is obsessed with assassin bugs. DM already approved animal form attacks for sneak attack so I will be taking a few levels of assassin rogue. What would be a good way mimic the assassin bugs using the bodies of dead prey as armor? Some sort of armorcrafting proficiency?
Why is it that druids can't wear metal armor or wield metal swords and what not BUT THEY CAN USE SCIMITARS?! Is this some kind of grognard over hang?
>>43561202
Because sickles.
>>43561202
Where does it say they can't wear metal armor or wield metal swords?
>>43561183
is there any significance about arcaen foci? Do they do anything particular? Or is it one of those things that are just in the background?
Assuming Hex is cast:
Bladelock at level 20: 2d6 + 2d8 + 20 (36) damage.
Tomelock at level 20: 4d8 + 1d6 + 5 (26.5), and 3d8 + 5 (45 total) to a secondary creature.
Bladelock resources: 4 ASIs, and two invocations.
Tomelock resources: 2 ASIs, and two cantrips.
>>43561216
It just says they're not proficient in them. Technically they do get racial and feat proficiencies. Also darts are metal (they're short javelins, not playing darts).
>>43560475
There was talk at the beginning of the thread about light weight solutions to bladelock. Try to understand their weaknesses and work with your DM to make a few houserules to bring them in line with other classes and you should be fine, especially if you MC into paladin (which is a nice bit of flavor if you ask me).
Regardless, bladelocks are still useful and you can always fall back on EB spam. I think the class' main strength is the flavor and RP potential anyway.
>>43559296
Fun in combat, but they don't have a lot going for them out of combat other than the initial flavor of the class origin and their level 1 thing. I think they're still cool, and profane soul actually plays a lot like how a bladelock should play in my opinion, and it doesn't really fall behind in damage.
It also seems relatively balanced.
>>43561226
>Do they do anything particular?
You can put them in the shield, if you're a divine caster, and cast while still having your hands occupied with shield and weapon. You can't do this with component pouches.
>>43561216
>>43561216
Under their armor proficiency in the PHB
>Armor: Light armor, medium armor, shields (druids will
not wear armor or use shields made o f metal)
>>43561202
Just a holdover from older editions. Non-natural armors would interfere with their magic use. Its one of those things that can just be ingored by a DM. Otherwise see about talking to your DM about getting Ironwood versions.
>>43561216
Armor: Light armor, medium armor, shields (druids will not wear armor or use shields made of metal)
>>43561157
Druid in 5e has only a small number of class features, of which the most significant is Wildshape, of the remaining 4 half of them (beast spells, archdruid) deal with wildshape. Druid has more dead levels than is normal for a full caster class, which are clearly structured based on Moon Druid's expanding repitoire of forms. Building a sword+board Druid in 5e is an exercise in futility. The whole class is absolutely built around wildshape and that's what makes Land Druid so inadequate, it fails to enhance the Druid's core>>43561183
feature.
>>43561227
>Bladelocks not taking GFB
Stop with this please. Dont be that guy.
>>43561227
>Still assuming the Bladelock isn't using GFB
>>43561283
>Bladelocks picking thirsting blade to never use it
Why go bladelock then? sincerely asking.
>>43561283
>>43561287
So bladelock is worse than tomelock till 12th level?
I mean, Tomelock is going to rise Cha sooner.
>>43561273
God I hate shit like this.. I would have picked something else if I had known it would be crap. I guess its my fault for not reading DEEPLY into the classes but at the same time, I am rather new and wanted to a try a caster that wasn't arcane or divine.
I actually use to play a battle master fighter and that was fun. Until I got a belt of giant strength and a plus 2 shield. Then I got pretty bored because I never felt threatened.
>>43561273
>It's wildshape centric because I say so
Wildshape without moon is only a convenient out of combat feature, it's definitely not the main combat feature druids are meant to have.
Why is it so important to all of you that bladelock and tomelock deal the same damage/one of them does a little more damage than the other when they both do enough damage to be useful? Dealing the most damage isn't the most important thing about playing this game. There are reasons to pick the class you want to play besides damage.
>>43561229
It straight up says they will not use metal armor
>>43561297
Who says they're picking thirsting blade? If I'm a necromancer and circle of death is a terrible spell compared to freezing sphere then why should I take it? Something more optimal is available so now I'm free to take a utility invocation instead, like Devil's Sight or Eyes of the Runekeeper.
>>43561297
1) You can't always set up the GFB pair
2) Even if you could, sometimes you want to focus fire on one target
3) If that isn't enough reason, you can just skip thirsting and go straight to Lifedrinker
4) You still get the automatic proficiency and weapons summoning
>>43561324
What else do they have then genius? Point to the other class feature that every land Druid has missed that would make them as useful as a Moon Druid.
>>43561350
So you use absolutely fucking nothing from bladelock till 12th level? why go bladelock then? by far most games end before 12th level
>>43561367
Land Druids don't lose wildshape. Combat Wildshape caps around level 5. And they still get good spellcasting and can cast in battle because they're not overreliant on being an animal that will be underpowered by level 8.
>>43561370
Pick polearm master, grab great weapon master, summon polearm, boom, you're better at dealing damage than a tomelock and you still use all features from bladelock.
>>43561283
>>43561287
Kay.
Assuming Hex is cast:
Bladelock at level 20: 2d6 + 2d8 + 20 (36) damage.
Tomelock at level 20: 4d8 + 1d6 + 5 (26.5), and 3d8 + 5 (45 total) to a secondary creature.
Bladelock at level 20 with GFB: 4d8 + 1d6 + 10 (31.5), and 3d8 + 5 (50 total) to a secondary creature.
Bladelock resources: 4 ASIs, and two invocations (+1 cantrip if using GFB).
Tomelock resources: 2 ASIs, and two cantrips.
I find it odd that Bladelocks are using more than twice as many resources to get 5 more damage, but Tomelocks are considered minmaxers.
>>43561227
I remember a while back I thought up a bladelock build that somewhat worked. The only way it would work pretty well is if the DM allowed you to have two pact weapons, rapiers in specific. One level in fighter to grab the dual wielding fighting style and you get:
3d6 (hex) + 3d8 (three rapier attacks) + 15 (Dex modifier times 3, assuming you have 20 Dex, make it 12 if you have 18 Dex) + 15 (lifedrinker three times with 20 Cha)
The downside is no offhand for casting spells, AC I guess might be low, but the mage armor invocation might help. How does this sound?
What are some decent feats for casters? My primary casting stat is already at 20 and doesn't need anymore boosting.
I like rituals but just how useful are those...? I see there is a feat for rituals.
>>43561370
Why NOT go bladelock? It's fun, has great RP, has a lower invocation tax (though a higher asi tax) and gets to use better magic items than tome (I'll take a 9-lives-stealer vs a +1 staff any day).
Besides, if you really wanted to consistently do more damage why not go full blaster? 4d10+40 with a 10ft push at 300ft vs 4d8 + 15 and sometimes 3d8+5. GFB might occasionally do more damage against mobs of enemies but EB is still far and away your more consistent option surely?
>>43561338
Well it matters a bit when you consider that Tomelick will do good damage with every ritual from every class is less MAD and therefore can get his save DCs high which synergizes with Pact Rod to make him a great debuffer
>>43561297
If your enemy is resistant to fire damage. If you don't have a second target to hit. Some multi-class builds will make use of this.
This just means that they arent forced to use their invocation on that one.
>>43561310
Unless you have armor proficiency from another source you will be as reliant on dex for AC as much as a bladelock. Bladelock gets more use out of that dex than a tomelock will since it gives them AC, attacks, and damage. Their spells will mostly be Hex in either case.
Speaking of which your first turn as a tomelock will be
>Shillelagh
>GFB attack
where the bladelock can toss out Hex immediately without having to wait one turn.
>>43561370
Because you get a magical weapon that you can summon to your hand.
>>43561428
Tomelock will still need those other two ASI's for increasing dex if they want any sort of AC to survive in melee you jackass
Now don't get me wrong I agree bladelock is a little underpowered. However I just think that they can do the melee job just as good as tomelocks can and even end up with more damage if done right.
