>Official /5eg/ Mega Trove, contains all official 5e stuff:
https://mega.nz#F!UVkTnT5b!FJ34UZ98BMY2mEtexenS7g
>Pastebin with homebrew list, resources and so on:
http://pastebin.com/X1TFNxck
>/tg/ Character Sheet
https://mega.nz/#F!x0UkRDQK!l-iAUnE46Aabih71s-10DQ
What are some cool encounters/BBEG's for a desert setting? Have you ever run a desert setting? Or if your characters have traipsed through a desert area as part of a campaign, how has it gone?
>>46604740
Some kind of mummy lord/lich hybrid would be good, or competing genie clans, almost all of which enslave the local non-genies. Blue dragons, standard evil warlords.
>>46604636
I tend to have level 1-2 be a lot less lethal by making players run combat-light sessions.
My last game started them with a heist on the local necromancer (another mage paid a local archissuppot (my TGs are basically miracle courts) a tidy sum for his spellbook); the place had a few traps (one lethal), one guard skeleton and mainly a few tricks like the book on his reading desk being a fake.
Still trying to figure out a good one shot for level 2.
>>46604793
>blue dragons
>mfw lightning breath in a land of sand
are desert blue dragon lairs made entirely of glass?
>>46604829
They are now.
>>46604829
>>46604848
I can dig it.
>>46604829
Would a Sand Remorhaz that makes big stretches of rocky glass across the desert be cool?
>>46604829
>>46604848
This is what sand does when it's struck by lightning
>>46604901
hell YES it would
stealing this for the desert campaign i'm building
>>46604902
what about with magic lightning
>>46604902
>tfw you're now thinking of using Stalker artefacts for objects affected by dragon breath and other magic phenomena
>>46604929
Magic lightning could turn sand into fucking flowers if the spellcaster wanted it to
>>46604740
Har'Akir for life
>>46604976
are blue dragon lairs in a desert made out of fucking flowers?
>>46605255
oh yeah
Building a desert setting that - as the amnesiac PCs come to find out - means they've actually been kidnapped and taken to the Elemental Plane of Fire. I eventually want them to make it to the City of Brass, but until then it'll be high emphasis on survival, using the rules for exhaustion and food/water intake in hot environments.
Obvious obstacles will include cinder storms, jackal/scorpion size foes (if they start at lvl 1), mirages, mephits, magmin... the fact that the sun never actually sets and so it's hot as blazes...
What makes a Plane of Fire desert different than a regular fantasy desert? Is the sand composed of worn-smooth globules of glass and chips of obsidian, in addition to the regular SiO2?
>Playing a GOOlock that serves Cthulhu or Yog-Shuggoth
>Not playing a GOOlock that serves Ghaunadaur, an Illithid Elder Brain, or an Eye Tyrant
I shiggydiggyforriggy hope that you don't conform to the D&D setting.
Sup niggas I can post again so I chose to post here
>>46606157
your moms pussy conforms to my dick
>>46604740
I ran a fairly short desert campaign based on Eefreeti dragging a portion of the elemental plane of fire into the middle of a desert so that they could establish a trade empire built on the backs of slaves.
Can't find classes, races, homebrews from anons in OP-post. Am I blind?
Thinking of running some kind of heist-based one-shot or short campaign. I've got some ideas kicking around, but does anyone have any ideas at things I should look at for reference? Most published adventures and stuff seem to be pretty standard dungeon crawlers.
>>46606368
They've been missing for some time now, and no one can really explain why or where they've gone.
>>46606368
Pretty sure the dropbox of /5eg/ homebrew wasn't being maintained and was almost a year out of date, guy who was doing it must have got bored of 5e. I'd say that was why it was removed. If someone gets the link of the old dropbox and was willing to maintain it then we could probably re-add it to the OP.
>>46606413
The Great Escape, because of attention to detail
Heat, because I've heard some good shit about it
Ronin, even though it's only 1/2 heist, and mostly spy bullshit, because it was pretty good
The Bank Job is alright, it's as straightforward as spy movies go
The Italian Job is another classic, watch it if you can.
Remember that most of the fun of the heist is in the planning. Planning for the approach, the break-in, the escape, planning on how to get all the resources for the above parts, planning for a scenario where things go wrong, planning for if that plan doesn't hold up. Plans plans plans. Most of the fun is from the planning and prep, so let your player's minds go wild trying to outsmart the guards and security systems.
Second part is the heist. As a rule, never goes smoothly, most often due to no fault of the heroes, but because of outside bullshit they never planned for, like a double cross or someone robbing the same bank at the same time. Note, THIS DOES NOT MEAN FAILURE. The key tension in any heist movie at this point is IMPROVISING. Making up a new plan on the fly to try and get away with the loot even in the face of this new complication. Whether the heroes fail at this or succeed, they usually go into...
The getaway. Your team has to run off and hide the loot. If things went well-ish, they have no pursuers, and all they have to do is wait it out until heat falls off. If things didn't go well, they have to shake off their pursuers, possibly change hideouts, and lay low for a long time to try and ditch any stalkers trying to kill them for the goods they stole.
How do Warlocks do for a stand alone class? I like the concept but their mechanics in 5e worry me some, if only a few slots that can theoretically regen faster makes me uneasy.
Any opinion or experience with the Unearthed Arcana Undying Light patron?
>>46606922
They're in no way imbalanced IMO. Haven't tried the UA Patron, but most UA stuff tends to be broken IF multiclassed, or just outright useless.
>>46604740
>The Desert Vampire is an undead creature that arises from the corpses of those who die of dehydration.
>Paradoxically, its decayed remains drip with moisture and water suffuses the ground around it, making it treacherous to navigate.
>Its goal is to slay desert travellers and drain them of moisture. To this end, it conceals itself beneath the sand and uses its magical abilities to create the illusion of an oasis or caravan above its hideout, ready to ambush those looking for a safe haven.
>The husk-like corpses of its prey are raised as zombies that assist the Desert Vampire in its attacks.
Pic related.
Other stuff on my desert random encounter table:
>Religious zealots trying to cross the desert on foot as a penitence
>Sand ships
>'Desert Mantids' - giant insects that disguise themselves as dead trees
>Racing Dunes - like a sand tidal wave
>A buried cistern - a conical depression in the sand leading to an artificial well
>A giant antlion trap - looks just like a buried cistern
>Saltflats - chance of salt mummies
>A shrine of bones and tattered husks guarded by giant scorpions and holding a staff of swarming insects.
Make necromancer school of wizardy good. how do?
>>46607570
Its already pretty decent. What more do you want?
>>46607570
You could let them spend all their 3rd level or higher spell slots raising skeleton archers that can kill just about anything in a single round of shooting.
>>46607570
Control UD @ level 3
Raise UD @ level 5
Sum total of minions cannot exceed half of your level
>>46604829
>lightning breath
My players will most probably be fighting a Green Hag next session. They're a 3rd lvl party of 4. Green Hag seems a bit boring though, in combat she only has a claw attack, vicious mockery and invisibility as viable options. What can I do to spice things up? Would it be too dangerous for them if I let her cast vicious mockery as a bonus action?
>>46607850
Have her appear as a hot mama, which i no doubt will have one of the PCs attempt to seduce.
Then when they're alone she can transform
>>46607896
Not likely, they've been sent there with the specific task of retrieving something from a swamp witch. They're not going to fall for it. Also she lives in a derelict cabin with furniture made of animal bones.
I'm looking specifically for something to make the combat more interesting.
>>46607947
Give her some swamp minions to fight with, like some Blights
>>46607850
Environmental effects are always fun. Entangling roots, marshy ground, that kind of thing. Maybe check out the green and black dragon lair actions.
Perhaps have some source of additional monsters. Like a cauldron bubbling over and spawning new horrors every round. The PCs might be able to stop it by tipping the cauldron over, which has bad effects of its own, and the PCs need to be able to get close enough to it.
Or a field of squalling mandrakes that uproot themselves when combat begins.
>>46606157
It's pretty retarded if you can go murder your patron.
Or if they can just die off screen to some other adventurers.
>>46607570
Necomancer is already really good. Their permanent minions are astonishingly potent and can break the action economy even when you can't fit them all into a dungeon. And as you levels go up their numbers, damage, health, and variety only grows. It doesn't even matter if you're reduced to cantrips.
Right off the bat at level 5 you can have 12 skeletal/zombie minions.
By 7th level that number grows to 24.
At 11th level you have 54 minions AND a strike force of 6 ghouls which can stunlock anything that isn't immune to it.
And lets not forget the potency that is your Command Undead feature which lets you keep a single one of the most powerful undead you find for extra utility. My favorite is to bind a Shadow to follow you around hidden in your own shadow to strike at anyone who dares approach you.
And here's the real kicker. Undead control lasts for 24 hours. Not until your next long rest. So you can reassert control over all your undead, then take your long rest and have all your spell slots available to you just in case of emergency. If you end up having to burn a higher level slot you just have to put down a few of your minions the next night.
>>46608430
The best (and most hilariously unlikely) way to use the Command Undead feature is to find something scary like the Death Knight, feeblemind it, Command it while it's feebleminded, then find the Deck of Many Things.
Every day, remove feeblemind, make it draw a card, Wish it never happened if it's not the int loss card, then command it not to resist the feeblemind and re-feeblemind it.
Once it draws the int loss card it's too stupid to ever break free, and it can't actually be destroyed until it's atoned for whatever vague sins it committed.
>>46608430
Wait can you even keep control over 54 minions?
>>46608505
Or you could find a mummy lord (Almost as unlikley) and bind it to your will. CR 15. Legendary Actions. 11 Int.
Go figure.
Vampire spawn, beholder zombies and a number of other undead fall in this range of int as well.
>>46608430
My favorite use of Command Undead is to take control of a Mummy Lord.
>>46608062
>Entangling roots, marshy ground, that kind of thing.
I'll use something like this, I think. Thanks!
>>46604829
No they live in a giant cake. It's a dessert there is no sand there.
:^)
>>46608520
Animate Dead animates one zombie/skeleton, or reasserts control over four you've animated.
>>46608549
Technically you could get an ancient dracolich with enough time and cards, but you're right that something like a mummy lord is a lot easier to find and a lot more likely to be okayed.
>>46608520
>Wait can you even keep control over 54 minions?
At 11th level you have 3 3rd, 3 4th, 2 5th, and 1 6th level spell slots. Arcane Recovery Provides one extra 6th level slot (Half of 11 rounded up).
Each cast of Animate undead creates 2 undead for you (by necromancer class feature) OR reasserts control over 4 undead.
That last part is the part most people miss
Each slot level above 3rd increases both numbers by two.
So a 3rd level slot creates 2 or controls 4.
A 4th level slot creates 4 or controls 6.
A 5th level slot creates 6 or controls 8.
A 6th level slot creates 8 or controls 10.
(4 x 3) + (6 x 3) + (8 x 2) + (10 x 2) = 66
That's assuming all spell slots go into Animate Dead though and none into your new Create Undead spell.
>>46604740
anyone got that roll a character website?
the one where it's like "you are bla bla, a human cleric who claims to worship x but secretly worships y" etc
Posting again.
So how good are wizards from level 3 to 10 (assume a level 3 start) FOR REAL, compared to, like, a bard or a cleric?
Assume your DM isn't going out of their way to hand out new spells, but isn't deliberately trying to deprive you of spells either. Assume you can't just go wizard-hunting on a whim either.
Seems like finding spells and blowing precious gold on scribing them is going to put a damper on you a lot of the time. Yeah, yeah, you get bonus spells at level ups, but clerics get ALL THE SPELLS, bonus domain spells auto-prepared, and medium armor and shields.
What do wizards REALLY have going for them? Rituals?
My DM managed to adapt Return to White Plume mountain to 5e. My rouge got Whelm the Warhammer, the money hungry racist.
Every time I asked him whether there was cash in a room my DM responded with these exact words if there wasn't: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aa1Megzxf8g
>tfw you have an imprint of keraptis and you say "no, yes" to the the vengeance guardian.
Is it a good idea to give my players a free feat at level 1?
I kinda feel that it would be a nice way of giving crunch to their personal fluff
>>46608736
There are plenty of get rich quick scams involving magic. Personally if I were to give players downtime I would just assume they could afford to copy spells by doing magical shit for money
As for whether they are useful? You better believe it, wizards be crazy
>>46608773
It will give them a quite significant boost in power, depending on what they choose, but it's not necessarily game breaking.
8th-level CG dark elf Rogue (thief)
PLUS
Fighting on large creatures rule meaning the dragon could only attack me with its tail attack
PLUS
Knowledge of anatomy (armor that you can feel through isn't very good armor - if a dragon's scales are meant to protect it then it can't feel through them)
PLUS
Dagger of Venom, Potion of Water Breathing, and 3 Healing Potions
PLUS
Absurd Hide and Acrobatics modifiers, contested by absurd Strength and Perception modifiers
PLUS
Being able to halve damage against me 1/round
EQUALS
My character just essentially solo'd an adult white dragon, the one you encounter in Rise of Tiamat. We went north first so apparently it was alone.
I say "essentially" because in fact the first 16 damage was done by my fellow party members before I mounted the thing and it flew off away from them, further than they could reach me. Its goal was to kill me personally. What ended up happening instead was that it was unable to dislodge me, I could Hide on its back to mean that it had to find me before it could attack me (granted it was very good at that - my +11 Stealth verses its +11 Perception, so it was basically a 50/50 shot each check).
It tried to drown me by shouting "I HOPE YOU CAN HOLD YOUR BREATH!"
To which my character quaffed her Potion of Water Breathing and responded "I CAN HOLD MY BREATH FOR A REALLY LONG TIME!"
With me being able to Sneak Attack the dragon each round (since when you're riding a larger creature you have Advantage against it), my damage against him was big enough that I killed it.
This is a big deal for me, dudes. I was forever DM'd for 10 years, never got to play D&D until recently. This is the first dragon any character of mine has ever slain.
Feels good. My character is now going to go around introducing herself as "Iliira Dragonslayer".
>>46608773
I did it, no big deal, I've just found I should probably adjust encounter CR accordingly
They got their ass handed to them by a single CR1/4 flying sword at lv 1 but they totally facerolled (but didn't manage to finish) a CR3 cult mage at lv 2
So YMMV
>>46608773
If they take one of the 4 or 5 most meta feats, like most people would, then it's done nothing but raise their power level for no reason.
Otherwise, it would help diversify them.
>>46608736
2 free spells per level is a lot. You can be more than competent with only the spells you get to add to your spell-book for free.
And wizards have the most variety and access to some unique spells as well which gives them unparalleled versatility rivaled only by the bard through magical secrets.
Cleric and Druid may have access to their full spell list every day but there is far less variety there to work from.
As for levels three to ten, every odd level wizards get a huge jump in power as they gain another spell level.
So at 3rd level you're scorching rays and holding person, then at 5th you've got fireballs taking out enitre encounters and have fly and haste to make your party members into juggernauts.
At 7th level you are suddenly a master of Elementals through Conjure Minor Elementals and can use Greater Invisibility to remain invisible while casting or even give the rogue supreme stealth for advantage on every attack.
By 9th level you control such horrors as Cloud Kill, Dominate Person, and Teleportation or even the power of Creation itself.
There is a lot of fun to be had as the undisputed master of the arcane. And that's not even touching on how fun some of the subclass abilities are all on their own.
>>46608818
*Mind, I went through all of my healing potions, my potion of water breathing, and was left with 4 hit points by the end of the ordeal, not to mention being 80 feet under frigid water desperately making Constitution saves to not get Exhaustion. I only barely managed to get out of the water, by which point the group's Dragonborn Ranger had caught up to me, cast Cure Wounds on me, and then is basically gonna have to carry me back to the group while my character asks him to please SET ME ON FIRE so I can be warm again.
My DM has also told me in no uncertain terms that I will never be able to do this ever again. Which I'm fine with.
Nevertheless! Feels good. Feels REAL good.
>>46608805
>>46608825
>>46608827
They're all newbies to DnD, so i fingured it could help them not get butchered.
Thanks people
Oh is there a pdf of that feat book? I heard it was shit, but i wanted to see for myself
>>46608818
>I could Hide on its back
Absolutely retarded.
>when you're riding a larger creature you have Advantage against it
What the fuck? Is that true?
That makes no fucking sense. If anything you should have disadvantage because you're trying to cling to it while it thrashes around.
>>46608854
>Cleric
>far less variety
Bullshit.
>>46608736
Wizards have rituals, a better spell list (especially for control) and pretty good schools.
An abjurer from 3-10 is going to mitigate a reasonable amount of damage and basically shut down enemy casters at 10.
A conjurer is going to have any small object they've seen - keys, books, lockpicks, they can have something useful. They'll also be able to swap places with party members at 6 and make summons much more useful by ignoring concentration at 10.
Diviners forces a success/failure on something important twice a long rest starting at level 2, so that's immediately useful. Then they get spells back for divining, letting them cast more than anyone except a point-chugging sorc.
Enchanters can lock down one enemy/person in or out of combat for whatever reason they might need to, and later redirect an attack to an enemy.
Evokers can throw damage spells around without risking team damage and squeeze an extra bit of damage out.
Illusionists can change their illusions with ease, negating a lot of the disadvantages to low-level illusion spells.
Necromancers can summon tougher, more damaging undead at a faster rate than any other wizard.
Transmuters can get a number of useful features to keep or give to the party, like resistance to a damage type, extra speed or proficiency on Con saves. They also poach most of the utility of a non-Moon Druid's Wild Shape at 10.
>>46604829
It says as much in the MM.
>>46608863
>What the fuck? Is that true?
It's in the DMG; give me a few minutes to find the page...
However, it makes total sense. Imagine I'm a human riding a bucking bull and I'm armed with a dagger. It'd be practically impossible for me to hit the bull with that dagger.
With a dragon it's even easier. Again, it's practically impossible to miss.
>Absolutely retarded.
Funnily enough I didn't even argue for this, it was my DM who pointed it out. However it makes sense based on all the depictions of white dragons in D&D. Their necks are relatively short for dragons, which would make it hard for them to look directly at the middle of their back. And, again, armor that you can feel through isn't armor, so he couldn't know with pinpoint accuracy where I was each round until I stabbed him.
Provided I remembered to make a Hide check, which actually I frequently forgot to do.
>>46608818
Why didn't it just do a barrel roll?
I'm super serious here. It's a dragon, it can survive a fall that would kill you, it knows you're somewhere on its back, so just flip turn upside down and fall to the ground with you between it and the ground.
shitty dm desu.
>>46608878
Alright, I'll give you that. Domain spells alone give the cleric enough variety to rival the wizard. But for the most part clerics don't get much in the way of the illusions, enchantments, and transmutations that wizards do. Those are usually reserved for the realm of arcane magics.
I mean, their spell list is still about half the size of the wizard before domains.
>>46608953
>It'd be practically impossible for me to hit the bull with that dagger.
Ugh, mea culpa. I meant to say *would be practically impossible for me to NOT hit the bull with the dagger".
Arcane Trickster rogue with Green-Flame Blade and a flyby-Help owl familiar: How good is it really?
Is it worth being a rogue for?
>>46608965
The fact that he didn't think of something like that, but instead made a player feel like he had accomplished something epic makes him a shitty DM?
Please, never DM
>>46608953
>Imagine I'm a human riding a bucking bull and I'm armed with a dagger. It'd be practically impossible for me to hit the bull with that dagger.
Uh, yes. Yes it would. That's 6/8s of a bull riding contest per round. And while that's happening you're trying to stab the fucking bull?
Have you never see the way bull riders get tossed around? Ignoring the difficulty of holding onto the bull one handed, you're now trying to drive a knife straight into it with force while your upper body is being tossed around like a ragdoll.
>>46608918
And you're going to have to shell out money for those spells unless you're fine with, like, two level 2 spells at PC level 3.
>>46609021
Verisimilitude is important
>>46609028
But what else do you need money for? You don't wear armor, which is what most classes are dumping money on at those levels
>>46608953
you are technically incorrect on the scales bit; even if the scales themselves transmit no sense of touch, heat, pain, etc etc, the skin underneath can still easily feel the shifting weight as different scales are pressed into it.
On top of that, armour that you can feel is still great armour if it stops a sword from sticking into more vital locations, like your heart or other organs.
Still, grats on the dragon kill, I know what being forever-DM is like, though I honestly can't say I'd leap at the chance to not DM anymore.
>>46608965
>Why didn't it just do a barrel roll?
It did. Hence my Acrobatics to run along it like it was a rolling barrel.
Oh, I found the Climb Onto a Bigger Creature rule. DMG page 271. You get Advantage because, as mentioned, it's essentially impossible to miss the creature.
>>46609028
Well, you're not spending it on half-plate, so that's fifteen spell levels you can grab.
That should tide you over until Fabricate and other money-making schemes are easily available.
>>46609043
>>46609086
Bards, archers, warlocks, etc. etc. aren't spending money on armor either.
>>46609026
>Ignoring the difficulty of holding onto the bull one handed, you're now trying to drive a knife straight into it with force while your upper body is being tossed around like a ragdoll.
Well...D&D is not a real life simulator, I guess is my rebuttal.
It's really iconic to be riding around on the dragon you're trying to slay, as well as being on the dragon allowing you to get at its vitals and so on. Hence the Climb Onto a Bigger Creature rules (DMG 271).
>>46608953
>armor that you can feel through isn't armor
huh? We're talking about magic here. Are sentient suits of armor not armored if they can feel you hitting them? Why would a biological, magical scale made of whatever have to obey rules observed about mundane metals and armors in a mundane world?
An adult white dragon has an AC of 18, which is natural armor. Those scales do provide protection, because that dragon is a pretty big target and easy to hit.
>>46609021
I do DM, and my players enjoy beating monsters after they've tried every dirty trick in the book, not just laid down to die.
>>46609062
That's better, but still iffy. I'd have given the dragon a chance to swipe you or make an attack as you crossed its belly.
Why would you ever be a Lore bard when the bonus skill proficiencies are completely irrelevant in the face of Jack of All Trades?
>>46609100
Also, the acrobatics feat would probably require a 25 or 30 DC.
>>46609117
Double Magical Secrets
>>46609117
>thinks anyone picks lore for the proficiencies
Extra magical secrets you brain-adled Tosevite
>>46609120
>Also, the acrobatics feat would probably require a 25 or 30 DC.
For what level?
>>46609094
Archers are damage-dealers whose spellcasting (if they have any) is dealing more damage, warlocks are primarily damage dealers from 3-10 with a few tricks, and bards have less known spells than a wizard.
>>46609117
You've already got armour or Extra Attack from another class, you want more out-of-class spells or you want to ruin the enemy's day with Cutting Words.
>>46609015
It's great if your GM isn't a dick about familiars. They die super easily. But having them to scout for you is incredibly good.
Improved Mage Hand is God Tier and hands down the best way to explore a dungeon, pick pockets, activate traps, or any number of other uses. Minor illusion is not to be overlooked either.
Charm Person and Sleep are great backup plans.
Alter Self is an amazing tool. Invisibility too but more so to help other people sneak since you will already be the best at it.
Haste needs little explanation. Hypnotic pattern can end encounters. Major image is great for utility.
>>46609145
>>46609151
You're getting basically nothing from Lore at levels 3-5 though.
>>46609177
And? What are you getting from Valor bard? An extra +2 AC and a martial weapon proficiency you wont use because you are probably built for dex anyways?
>>46609157
using acrobatics to stay on top of a spinning, angry dragon would be a legendary feat, and require a somewhat legendary difficulty. That doesn't change if the players are level 1 or 20. Just the likelihood of them succeeding on it does.
do you scale down difficulty of tasks if the players are low level? I can understand only presenting a low level party with low level skill challenges, but not scaling down the difficulty of unplanned and improvised actions the players try to take., or any really difficult things that have.
>>46609217
Medium armor and a shield is breddy gud.
Pick up a rapier, a shield, and medium armor and go to town.
Has anyone homebrewed anytihng like combat drugs? It was something i had wanted to put in a game
>>46609177
Cutting words? You're saying it's not good to have enemies fail at everything at every whim? Combine with viscous mackingry for auto-fails at everything
>>46609100
>That's better, but still iffy. I'd have given the dragon a chance to swipe you or make an attack as you crossed its belly.
The DM did. But a decent AC on my part, some poor rolls on the DM's part, and the Rogue's Uncanny Dodge letting me halve damage 1/round meant that it was less effective than you'd think.
>Are sentient suits of armor not armored if they can feel you hitting them?
No, I don't mean that it doesn't function to protect you - the dragon still had its 18 AC. But if you can feel pain through armor then it isn't really doing a good job *as* armor.
Reptiles don't have nerve endings in their scales, and dragons wouldn't, either, especially given that dragon scales are usually depicted as being more like, well, actual scale armor, with overlapping small plates, rather than essentially really tough skin. While the idea that my character was exerting pressure on the scale has some merit, my character with all her gear weighs only like 150 pounds. The dragon's carrying capacity is something like 6,240 pounds. I'm literally not heavy enough for it to notice.
It's not like the dragon didn't know I was there - I was stabbing it in the back and neck repeatedly (never got to actually use the Dagger of Venom's venom property, unfortunately - it was more important that I attack each round instead of wasting an action on activating its venom).
The Perception check was so that its tail slap attack wasn't made blind, since, again, due to the way white dragons are depicted in D&D it wouldn't really have been able to crane its neck to see me directly.
>>46609227
I'm not saying Valor Bard isn't just as good as Lore Bard but Shield in the off hand does fuck up your casting a little bit. But that doesn't matter if you have Warcaster, which you really need as a Valor Bard anyways.
Cutting Words is Aces though.
>>46609232
I'm working on a warlock subclass for the witch that will feature something like that. Right now I've got a poison based pact (need to fill out the poisons though), and I'm thinking another pact would be buff potions.
But the buffs and poisons I would add would be usable by any character that knows how to make them.
Here's the WIP. It might not be the most current, I've shifted voodoo dool to invocations.
>>46609220
>using acrobatics to stay on top of a spinning, angry dragon would be a legendary feat, and require a somewhat legendary difficulty.
Still, a DC30 roll is a significantly different thing at level 1 than it is at level 20. Such is the nature of the mechanics; changing either the bonus OR the target changes the roll regardless.
>do you scale down difficulty of tasks if the players are low level?
I set DCs based on character level with around a ±5 from a baseline. If I don't want characters to do something, I simply tell them they can't rather than setting an arbitrarily high DC, or I don't put them in a scenario where they will face such an arbitrarily difficult task.
>>46609220
>using acrobatics to stay on top of a spinning, angry dragon would be a legendary feat
Why? It's just spinning really fast, doesn't matter if it's a barrel or a dragon; the difficulty is in dealing with the claw swipes. Though for the record the DC was in fact 25, but when you have the Lucky feat and a +8 to Acrobatics...
Besides which, such an act consumes a dragon's action, which was really better off spent attacking me - I forgot to Hide half the time, and the dragon did have Legendary actions, so it could use Perception to spot me (it usually did even when I remembered) and then its subsequent actions and legendary actions to attack with its tail.
>>46609278
>Still, a DC30 roll is a significantly different thing at level 1 than it is at level 20
Not really all that true in 5th ED because of bounded accuracy and all.
>>46609289
>Not really all that true in 5th ED because of bounded accuracy and all.
Not really. Let's use Rogue and Acrobatics.
A 1st Rogue level character can reasonably be expected to have a 17 (+3) in Dexterity. Add in Proficiency (+2) and Expertise (double proficiency), and he'll have an Acrobatics of +7. So the DC 30 check is literally impossible.
Skip ahead to level 20, and the same rogue sans magic items now likely has a +5 to Dex and a +12 modifier due to Expertise and Proficiency, for a total modifier of +17. So he makes the DC 30 check on a roll of 13 or better, or 40% of the time.
40% is a significant improvement over "literally never".
>>46609278
As a DM, I structure encounters and adventures so that generally speaking, the party won't encounter any legendarily difficult skill rolls But, if they're doing something that I haven't planned for, or for some reason, the story calls for one of those really difficult skill rolls, then you don't pull the punches. That just cheapens things for the players.
To put it another way: I don't force high difficulty on my players at low levels, but if they try to do something that would be extremely difficult, then I'm not going to reduce the challenge just because they attempted it at level 1 instead of 10. This is one of the better things 5e does than 4e: actions have objective difficulty. There's no need to factor in party level when trying to figure out how hard something is.
>>46609362
Right, this is intentional. The rogue gets better at skills as hie levels up. Who knew?
>>46609362
Oh, and as an addendum the Rogue will make DC 27 or lower Acrobatics checks 100% of the time, thanks to based Reliable Talent.
>>46609389
>Right, this is intentional. The rogue gets better at skills as hie levels up. Who knew?
My point is that the assertion - essentially, "bonded accuracy means there's little difference between a DC 30 skill check at level 1 and the same check at level 20" - is just plain wrong.
Is dualclassing a good option in 5e? What are some cool combinations? Monk/Warlock is the only one I have heard of so far, and it seemed rather gimmicky and anti-teamplay.
>>46604740
Homebrew this.
https://youtu.be/z-GAU2warA4
And your players may have a great time if done right! Remember to be cleaver with how to kill it instead of giving it hp and dmg.
>>46609162
If the DM lets a familiar take the Help action in every single round of combat, it makes complete sense that enemies would target the familiar in a fight. If a familiar is just used as a scout, that's still pretty good because it means the rogue has no excuse to split the party anymore, but people shouldn't attack the familiar unless they manage to catch the familiar acting in an unnatural way.
>>46609424
>dualclassing
Not really a thing in 5e. Multiclassing rules have changed.
>monk/warlock
Probably not a viable combination. I don't see how either of those would benefit each other.
>>46609424
Multiclassing gives you a wider variety of abilities in place of the focused abilities of a single class. So long as you don't make yourself too MAD, most combos are fine. Just be aware of certain caveats, such as Extra Attacks not stacking, ability score improvements being set class features, and not having access to higher-level spells despite having higher-level slots.
>>46609424
sorcerer/warlock is the one for people attempting to break the game by shooting more than the customary amount of lasers in a turn. Just like in 3rd, most of the weapon-using classes can take a couple of levels of fighter with good results. Barbarian/rogues can work if you wield finesse weapons but use Strength to attack with them.
>>46609452
Shadow monk with Devil's Sight and Darkness.
>>46609424
Monk/Warlock sounds horrible. MAD all over the place. Although I guess you don't really need charisma if you're only grabbing it for hex. But then why not just take magic initiate?
At least pick two classes that have some core attributes in common. Any of the Charisma Casters mesh nicely, for example.
Also, the general rules with Multiclassing are to not take more that 3 levels (maybe four to keep your Attribute Bonuses on track)in your secondary class or you lose out on late game features, always get Extra attack before multiclassing, limit loss of spell progression as much as possible, and to be aware of how you mess up your Attribute Progression and avoid multiple attribute dependencies. Also Cantrips are always good and scale regardless of class.
>>46609452
Monk/Warlock was mostly about the darkness+shadow monk.
I think it can be replicated better these days with Warlock/Sorc, thanks to that underdark UA.
>>46609389
>Right, this is intentional. The rogue gets better at skills as hie levels up. Who knew?
How can you say that bounded accuracy makes something not accurate, then openly admit it is exactly accurate?
>>46609389
>But, if they're doing something that I haven't planned for, or for some reason, the story calls for one of those really difficult skill rolls, then you don't pull the punches.
I didn't either. If they're fighting a dragon of their level, the rolls should be comparable. That dragon doesn't suddenly become a challenge 10 levels higher because they're doing a niche action.
More importantly, I don't understand why DMs feel a need to punish players for improvising actions. You shouldn't arbitrarily scale up difficulty because someone is trying something impressive; this is a world where nerds can fucking make blasts of fire with chants and waves of their hands, yet the rogue staying on a flying dragon seems nuts to you?
>>46609424
Cleric 1/Wizard X is pretty decent, you get medium (or heavy if you have strength for some reason) armour, a shield, level 1 cleric spells and a domain power.
In exchange you're one level behind in spells (but not spell slots) until level 18, at which point you hit parity again.
>>46609482
Unless you're starting at level 5, that's entirely not worth the progression delay.
>>46609493
You could reduce some MAD with Shillelagh or Mage armor. I mean, it's essentially like having 16 Wis; drops off once you could afford ASI to improve it tho, but that's at like, what 12 at the soonest.. probably later because you are multiclassing. You could also just ignore any spells with saves or attack rolls and dump CHA, as silly that sounds. You got quite a few good buff spells, Hex, Flight, etc.
>>46609523
>Warlock/underdark Sorc
RAW, you don't even need the warlock levels anymore, provided the darkness was cast by you.
Still, UA, though...
>>46609530
CR has nothing to do with it. CR is a broad tool to estimate the difficulty of fighiting a monster, not running circles around it mid flight. Gravity doesn't suddenly get a lot easier to fight against because the dragon has a lower CR number in the monster manual. The dragons don't suddenly fly slower for the players (in fact, Ancient Red Dragons fly as fast as Ancient White, despite there being a 4 CR difference between the two).
This isn't about punishing the players. It's about making sure their epic successes are predicated on appropriate difficulty. Not ez mode, as you would have it.
>>46609592
>This isn't about punishing the players. It's about making sure their epic successes are predicated on appropriate difficulty. Not ez mode, as you would have it.
Your definition of EZ mode is making sure that players can actually make a roll?
Nigga, you can't be serious.
I'm the same way. I want their epic successes to be predicated on appropriate difficulty. So the weaker the dragon, the worse it is at shaking off an enemy. It's not that the dragon is flying slower, or gravity is getting easier... DC is an arbitrary value defining difficulty for the context of the game mechanics. There's nothing inherently "more realistic" about setting the DC based on "realistic" difficulty or difficulty relative to level.
Why? Because it turns out that there's nothing fucking realistic about taking on an armored flying reptile that can breathe fire with fucking feudal-tech weaponry, you fucking tool.
>>46609592
Well, to bring all that to a close, Iliira Dragonslayer, for whatever reason, had an epic success. She nearly died for it, but now she has a dragon's horde to plunder (split evenly with the rest of the party even if they didn't really contribute to the fight beyond the first 16 points of damage) and a story to spread throughout the Sword Coast.
Maybe people who see her will now say "look, it's Iliira, who slew Arauthator, Old White Death, and stole his horde!" instead of "look! A dark elf! Run and hide!"
(My character's motivation is to become the greatest thief who ever lived not for the stuff, but so that people who see her will know her as that rather than as a drow)
>>46609424
Assassin 3 comboes well with Paladin and Fighter if you're trying to be a really effective assassin and blow things up in the first round.
It's awkward to get all the pieces together, though.
>>46609530
When a player wants to improvise an action, what you as a DM have to ask yourself is how likely this action is to be repeated later in the campaign. Making a ruling sets a precedent for how you should handle the same thing in the future, and if you agree to an improvised action that a PC can do every single turn, you shouldn't make it so good that the character SHOULD do it every single turn. On the other hand, you can be a little more lenient with situations that will hardly ever come up, like staying atop an unwilling flying creature of Huge size or larger that's trying to buck you off.
>>46605377
Basalt dunes
>>46609687
>When a player wants to improvise an action, what you as a DM have to ask yourself is how likely this action is to be repeated later in the campaign.
But when those actions are predicated on elements that adjust as the players scale up, it's not an issue.
For example, having the first-level rogue leap a 30-foot chasm at 1st level is a bit much. But if I have no problem with him leaping on the back of a 20th-level giant creature at 20th level, I should have no problem with him leaping on the back of a 1st-level giant creature at 1st level, right?
And theoretically, those tasks would be somewhat equal.
>>46609664
You're playing the wrong game if you want everything to be possible. Try freeform RP. I'm super serious about this. A game with rulesets that allow for the possibility of failure doesn't sound like it would be fun for you, and there's no shame in enjoying a game where failure is not a possibility.
However, this is a truth about the ruleset of 5e: some actions are impossible. Some actions are extremely improbable. This is why they introduced the boudned accuracy system, with objective measures of difficulty (trivial, easy, moderate, hard, etc). If you want a game where the world alters its difficulty based on party level, try 4e
So 4e or freeform are my recomendations for you. Meanwhile, my players will enjoy the fact that the world doesn't bend over backwards to make things possible for them, that they have to work for it. It makes the epic feats that much more satisfying when they happen. And if you don't take my previous recommendations, I highly recommend you try this one. But I doubt you actually DM at all.
>>46609734
>You're playing the wrong game if you want everything to be possible.
I don't want everything to be possible. I want everything that fantasy heroes are capable of doing to be possible. Fantasy heroes leap onto the backs of dragons, so that should be possible.
>I'm super serious about this.
Then you're retarded, and have no clue what running a game entails.
>However, this is a truth about the ruleset of 5e: some actions are impossible.
No shit. We're talking about jumping on a dragon in D&D, not eating the sun.
Are you retarded?
>>46609732
That's what opposed checks are for. Your ability to cling to a creature should logically be pitted against the creature's ability to throw you off. And those don't always scale perfectly with level. Since so few monsters have trained skills, the PCs' skill bonuses scale more with level, so a first-level character riding an ogre will have a much harder time than a 15th-level character riding a storm giant.
Also, you don't need to improvise rules for how much distance a character can jump. There are rules for that already. Just like there are rules for grabbing and climbing that you can put to use in situations like these.
>>46609764
>No shit. We're talking about jumping on a dragon in D&D, not eating the sun.
Which confuses me a bit since it's explicitly possible - it's outlined on Page 271 of the DMG.
Again, for all involved in the discussion, it's not like Iliira leaped onto the back of the white dragon and then was utterly invulnerable and gibbed the dragon in a single fight. By the end of the battle Iliira was at 4 hit points, 80 feet under frigid water, and out of healing potions. One more hit of ANY kind from Arauthator would have killed her, even with Uncanny Dodge, since the dragon's minimum damage with his tail slap was 10 damage (so, okay, not killed Iliira, but put her at 0 and needing to make Death saving throws while the dragon was free to eat her). The water in and of itself wasn't dangerous due to the Potion of Water Breathing she'd used, but the frigid temperature is gonna start doing a serious number on her health soon enough. Her cold weather gear is now soaked and useless for its intended purpose - she's literally better off stripping naked then staying in it despite the air temperature on the surface being -10 degrees Fahrenheit.
Fortunately she has several change of clothes; unfortunately none of them are cold weather gear.
By the time Iliira is dragged back to the rest of the party by the group's ranger, I fully expect her to have gained several levels of Exhaustion and be useless for the rest of the dungeon.
I want to build a Dragonborn fighter that sells his soul to an evil dragon god for power.
Mechanically I see this as multiclassing as a Warlock.
How should i handle this?
>>46609927
Well, first you should build a dragonborn fighter.
Then you should find a receptive evil dragon god.
Then you should multiclass warlock.
>>46609889
>That's what opposed checks are for.
And for opposed checks, the defending player's roll can be represented by a passive DC based on their skill rolls. That would be a variable difficulty based on level and stats of creature, not on gravity, as anon is claiming in >>46609120.
>>46609942
>>46609927
Dragon Blood sorceror as a different color of dragon? Like a gold dragonborn with red scales growing in patches or a copper that is rusting into a green.
>>46609952
Correction, I meant to refer to >>46609592
>>46606680
Thanks, but I was hoping for references more so for what kind of mechanics to use/consider making for a DnD heist as opposed to ideas for the heist itself. I've looked at some shadowrun stuff, but it seems kind of difficult to translate that into 5e, skills being how they are.
>>46609952
I mean, it's a fine line between the things that are best represented by opposed rolls and the things that are just inherently difficult. If a creature is so large that it isn't even aware of humanoids riding it and just happens to be moving in a way that's hard to balance on, that could be represented by a flat DC. And a DM might rule that an opposed roll is so inherently lopsided that one side has advantage, another side has disadvantage, or both.
>>46610016
What do you mean what kind of mechanics? What do you need that isn't in the rules already?
>>46610028
Absolutely agreed. But I also don't believe that the DC should be set arbitrarily high so as to make the action virtually impossible, as that idiot was saying. Climbing onto a giant monster is a staple of fantasy. It should not be impossible for fantasy characters to do.
>>46609927
Fighter 2 / Warlock 18
>>46609764
The rules provide for fantasy heroes to be able to do all that. After a certain level. The rules provide for certain tasks to be possible at higher levels and impossible at lower levels.
>>46610103
Or even better Fighter 1/warlock 19
Because if you're gonna do 2 levels in fighter you might as well go 6 so you can have extra attack, subclass, 2 ASI/feats and second wind
>>46610188
>The rules provide for fantasy heroes to be able to do all that. After a certain level.
Show me the mandatory level requirements of leaping onto a dragon from a book, please.
I rolled 12 16 12 13 18 13. Any ideas of class/race combination? Start from 1st level.
>>46610228
First: this is about running around on a dragon as it did a barrel roll to avoid falling.
Second: there are none. There are mechanics that provide for players gaining ability as they get more experienced. And the objective difficulty scale.
What would you as a DM say if a player wants to switch character because he's not comfortable/good at roleplaying his current character?
>>46610288
Let him after a scripted and dramatic character exit/death
>>46610259
>First: this is about running around on a dragon as it did a barrel roll to avoid falling.
Okay, that's great. That's essentially like a log roll, plus other factors like the motion of flight. Difficult, but not entirely impossible in a fantasy setting.
Still, I'd set the DC based on the dragon (likely its passive Athletics score; I'm assuming its using forceful motions to try and shake the character).
>>46610256
You've got an 18 and a 16. You can play anything with any race and be above-par.
>>46608818
Running on 8 years as Forever GM without a Dragon to slay. I am playing now and my GM has hyped up a dragon fight in the next 3 or so weeks IC. I look forward to losing my dragon slaying virginity.
What's more powergamey in your opinion:
A keen mind variant Human conjurer wizard
Or
An Eldarin diviner wizard
Or
A mountain dwarf abjurer wizard
Either of the first two would be a criminal, basically an arcane trickster that is more arcane than trickster
The dwarf is just a fucking dwarf that finds magic to be a convenient way to survive after escaping dwarf jail in his youth
>>46610217
I'd say you gain a lot from Action Surge, then again the pact stop being unique after 14 in the Lock.
I'd say is party dependent/ person flavour really
>>46610303
Gotcha, I'll just find something suitably entertaining to kill my character.
>>46610217
Action surge is amazing to the point even a wizard might consider Fighter 2.
GREETINGS MORTALS
I HAVE TIRED OF THE ANCIENT WAYS OF LAW AND CHAOS, GOOD AND EVIL.
WHILE THE RULESET OF THE PRESENT IS PLEASANT, ITS SYSTEM FOR DETERMINING CHARACTER PERSONALITIES ARE WEARING THIN ON MY NERVES, AND HAVE CAUSED A GREAT MANY ARGUMENTS AT MY TABLE.
I BESEECH OF THEE, REVEAL TO ME A MORE NUANCED ALIGNMENT SYSTEM THAN A SIMPLE TWO-AXIS SYSTEM.
>>46610555
The best alignment system is none at all. Achieve personality nuance by focusing on traits, bonds, ideals, and flaws, like the game tells you to.
>>46610555
Selfish v Selfless, Y axis
Long term vs Short term, X axis
Pragmatic vs Dogmatic, Z axis
>>46610555
Beliefs, Traits, Flaws. Tells everything you need to know about a person more accurately than alignment.
Alignment isn't even really necessary anymore.
>>46609927
Fighter 1/Fiend Bladelock 9
Paladin 20 of Vengeance
Favored Soul Sorcerer 20
Lots of neat ways to do it mechanically, it's up to you do decide how smoothly that goes. If you wanna stay melee, then FIghter/Lock or Paladin are the ones I feel best recommending.
>>46610555
>I BESEECH OF THEE, REVEAL TO ME A MORE NUANCED ALIGNMENT SYSTEM THAN A SIMPLE TWO-AXIS SYSTEM.
Personality, ideal, trait, bond.
>>46610555
Roll a D20, then gauge how much of a shit you give about the result, then think about how you feel about a group of people in general. Unite these two abstract attitudes and generalize them to include every situation you find
Congratulations, you are now Ambivalent Hostile
>>46610256
Since you're rolling, let's be oldschool about this and assume you were rolling in-order. Let's get older-school by assuming you were rolling in-order back when the order was str/int/wis/dex/con/cha so you get...
Str: 12
Int: 16
Wis: 12
Dex: 13
Con: 18
Cha: 13
Looks like a pretty strong case for a Wizard you got there.
>>46610555
New stats that are used to gauge personality:
>Loyalty
>Honor
>Passion
>Aggression
>Faith
>Generosity
Roll 3d6 or choose for every stat. Players and DM use the personality stats as a help for roleplaying. If they want to, players can add specializations for the stats, i.e.
>Loyalty 5 - selfish
>>46610555
To pick a better system, oh mighty wizard of trips and capital letters, you first need to decide how you feel about alignment in the first place.
>Alignment is a descriptive construct and not a mechanical one, kept around for tradition's sake
Throw out the mechanic altogether, use some version of the personality traits system (IE, steal a similar system from another game).
>Alignment should be meaningful and have major dramatic impact
Play a different RPG, because that doesn't mesh with modern D&D, and it's better to have two different systems that each do their own thing well, than to try to have one system that does both.
>>46609927
You could just go arcane knight, and use the selling his soul as fluff
>>46610256
Dragonborn Valour Bard. Be a tribal warrior skald. Inspire your allies into a murderous frenzy with hope that if they kill enough shit someday they can become the physical and mental paragon of Draconic majesty that you are.
>>46610682
What do those even measure? That seems arguably worse than the current one. Loyalty to who? Honor in what sense? Faith in what? Generosity in which situations?
That might work in like Lot5R, but not DnD.
Can anyone recommend a grid battle mat?
>>46610720
That's what specialization is for. Oh, and if you have exceptions to your stats (say, a spy of questionable moral who is only loyal to his king) put them in parenthesis, like so:
>Loyalty 5 - the crown (15), selfish
>>46610744
The Chessex ones on Amazon are pretty good for the price. Be sure to use wet-erase markers on them and not dry-erase though, or you'll ruin them.
>>46610555
> ITS SYSTEM FOR DETERMINING CHARACTER PERSONALITIES
Wrong wrong wrong wrong.
Wrong wrong wrong wrong.
Alignment is the result of your personality, not the source of it, dingus.
>>46610217
Is that a joke? Action Surge is so good that Fighter 2 is one of the best multiclasses in the game.
>>46610555
Pretty much what other anons before me said - use the traits, bonds, ideals and flaws to craft the character's personality. I personally add to that beliefs, instincts, and goals, as seen in other systems. Achieving their goal, their instinct getting them in trouble, or sticking to their belief when it is being challenged earns them inspiration/more xp/whatever.
You can use the alignment system afterwards and based on how the players play their characters and what their ideal/bond/flaw/belief/instinct/goal is determine their alignment. They will often come out as neutral.
>>46610682
prudence
justice
temperance
fortitude
faith
hope
charity
>>46610895
Not the OP but I'd say it depends on when you get it, cause it pushes your Extra Attack off another level or so. I'm playing a Bladelock now, and I'll probably pick up fighter level or 2 at 6, and maybe 7.
>thinking about how to implement non-standard weaponry effectively as a rogue
>"what if I dual wield a net and a short-sword, throwing the net for my action and converting my bonus action to a melee attack with advantage, granting me sneak attack!"
5e PHB, pg 148
"When you use an action, bonus action, or reaction to attack with a net, you can make only one attack regardless of the number of attacks you can normally make."
Fuck.
>>46610682
>not rolling 6d20 down the line for alignment.
WHEN'S THE NEXT BOOK COMING OUT
I know it rather depends on party comp and what the encounters you face are, but which 5e class/multiclass combo have you noticed performing exceptionally well?
I, personally, found Rogues to be really powerful at least in the early levels, dealing much more damage than I would have anticipated (in comparison to the rest of their party, consisting of 1x barb 1x fighter and 1x cleric).
>>46611177
We won't know until a month or two before its release.
>>46604740
I've actually been running a game set in a desert for almost a year now (mostly because the group is semi-weekly and we skip sessions now and then). I haven't run much in the way of traditional DnD monster's other than a zombified wyvern. I made some octopi with acid instead of ink and that was cool, also some converted sand hunters, from 3.5's Sandstorm book, in a sandstorm itelf. The players loved it.
>>46611180
A 1 or 3 level dip in warlock goes well with any charisma class.
>>46611180
Sorcerer X/Warlock 3. 2X*(1d10+1d6+5) for EB. Pretty straightforward.
>>46611040
Any way to circumvent this while maintaining RAW? Or am I misinterpretting it?
For example, a fighter:
>Beginning at 5th level, you can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn.
Does the net rule apply only to making multiple attacks using the same action as above?
(ie: fighter uses attack action, he can't extra attack if he attacks with the net)
However, if he uses his attack action to attack with the net, ends his attack action there, abiding by the net rule, and then converts his bonus action to an melee attack (outside of the attack action), that would indeed abide by the rule of the net?
>>46611040
>>46611466
The text says when you use the action, bonus action, or reaction to make the attack, you can only make one. It imposes no such restriction on other action classes. That means no Extra Attack, no Multiattack, etc.
Actually would be great if you have a mage casting Haste on you. Since you can only make one attack with that action anyway, one loses no attacks with it.
>>46611466
The way I'm reading it is that if you have one attack with an action, then you can make one attack with the net.
If you have three attacks with one action, then you can still only make one attack with the net.
BUT, if you have some ability that lets you use a bonus action to make an attack, then you can still do that. Because that's an entirely separate action from the net attack.
>>46611466
There's no "circumventing" RAW, there's just rulings and RAI. For example, a DM could reasonably interpret this as meaning that the Attack action (whether resulting from an reaction, bonus action, or vanilla action) cannot result in both a net attack and an attack with something else as part of that same action, and that other actions taken by the same character are not affected by this. Under this (probably reasonable) interpretation, a 6th level Fighter wielding a net and a shortsword could:
> Bonus action (TWF) attack with the net
> Action attack twice with the sword (extra attack class feature)
> Action Surge attack twice with the sword (extra attack class feature)
Meanwhile a 6th level Rogue similarly equipped could
> Attack with the net
> Dash or some bullshit
>>46611040
>>46611557
>>46611466
Do remember that whatever method is being used to convert the attack to a bonus action, it must work with ranged attacks.
>>46611631
According to pic related, I don't believe that the bonus action can be used to make an attack until after the attack action has been used. So the fighter could attack with the net and sacrifice his extra attack ability and then attack with advantage with his bonus action
>>46611659
As per pic related, either light weapon can be thrown if it has the thrown property.
Use a trident and a net
Be the motherfucking retiarius
>>46611758
Taking the attack action doesn't mean you've already made any attacks. The way I understand the new action economy, it's more of a commitment to use your action to attack with a weapon.
That's why you can move, attack, move, attack, etc. Once you declare your actions, you can perform them in any order.
>>46611040
That special property emulates Loading for crossbows. It's only meant to prevent you spamming the attack if you have Extra Attack. It's one per action, one per bonus action, and one per reaction max, not one per turn. If it was once per turn or round, it would say so.
You can't TWF with it anyway, because it's a non-light ranged weapon.
>>46612079
A net isn't a ranged weapon, it's a thrown weapon, meaning it can be used in two weapon fighting (see >>46611758).
And with the Dual Wielder feat it doesn't have to be light, either. No problemo.
>>46611758
The order of your action, move, and bonus action (if any) are up to the player.
>>46612156
>A net isn't a ranged weapon, it's a thrown weapon
>>46612456
And here we were thinking 5e was making D&D simple again. Such fools, we are!
>>46612156
>>46612456
>>46612474
>A net isn't a ranged weapon, it's a thrown weapon,
There's nothing stopping a weapon from being both, which the net is. It is pretty simple.
>>46612456
Let me rephrase that: a net has the thrown property (which you helpfully didn't include in your very selective screenshot) so it can be used in two-weapon fighting.
>>46612679
It doesn't matter if it's thrown or not. What matters is if it's a melee weapon, which it is not.
I know that advantage on saving throws against a certain condition works on all saving throws against it, even if succeeding on that save would have another effect besides just preventing the condition, such as reducing damage.
But how does this resolve with immunity? Would the creature be immune to all effects (including damaging effects) that cause the condition, or would they be considered to auto-succeed on all saving throws against it?
I have a player who's been angry at me for like a month straight and constantly complains that the devs are stupid assholes because creatures that are resistant to being blinded are resistant to spells like Sunburst and Sunbeam (which blind). Then we ran into a creature who was immune to being blinded altogether and I ruled that the spells flat-out didn't work, and he got even madder and kept interjecting saying how stupid it was and how it didn't make any sense because "putting on sunglasses doesn't make you better at dodging explosions".
If my meek halfling character is always on the shoulders of another party member is it worth getting the Mounted Combatant feat?
>>46612810
Actually nvm, you seem to be correct, at least RAW. On the other hand, net+trident is such a classic that I'd consider allowing it anyway (perhaps with a special feat or a variation on Dual Wielder).
>>46612984
I agree with your player. The blinding is a side effect of the spell. Preventing the damage is like saying that immunity to poison makes you immune to poisoned weapons. Which is obviously silly.
>>46606368
Someone asked and no one said they wanted it gone and a couple were against removing it, but they just did it anyway.
>>46612987
Probably not.
Most things are not going to be smaller than the medium-size-creature that your other party member likely is.
Making the other player take attacks is kind of an eh move, have to talk to other player
Making dex saving throws safer is cool, I guess?
>>46613033
Yeah, unless it specifically requires eyesight to function, like a vampire's charm ability perhaps, it works perfectly well against blind enemies, or things that don't see with normal vision.
>>46612984
If it's immune to a condition that's a side effect of a spell, it isn't immune to that spell. Sunburst would still do radiant damage as normal, but if it fails it wouldn't be blinded.
>>46612984
Immunity to a condition simply means the creature would never have that condition applied to him, just as immunity to a damage type means the creature would never take damage of that type.
It has never come up at my table, but I wouldn't rule on resistance the way you're describing. If you are resistant to blinding, and are put in a position to save against a damaging effect that also blinds on failure, I'd allow a single save against the spell. If the save fails, I'd allow a second roll to save just against the blinding effect, with the character still taking the full damage he'd normally be subject to.
I'm about to play DnD for the first time, and I'm DMing.
Tips?
>>46612984
Your player is right.
If I have a spell that does damage and blinds, but my target is immune to being Blinded, they still take damage.
>>46613096
Be descriptive about everything. Sights, smells, textures, everything.
>>46613096
Make sure everybody gets to take a turn at providing input even if you aren't in the middle of an initiative situation.
Try to avoid flipping through the books/pdfs. If you don't know the rule, make a ruling (whatever seems reasonable in the circumstances), and try to circle back around and see what the actual rule was later, between game sessions. This keeps things moving and eventually leads to a strong knowledge of the actual rules.
Roll out in the open. You're not your players' enemy; your dice are. Let the inanimate objects take the heat for that total-party-kill.
>>46613162
>Roll out in the open
Because having your first goblin encounter with them critting twice in a row is fun for the players, right?
>>46613162
Yes
NO
no
>>46613096
Forget the rules and just roll dice whenever you think your players expect you to. Ignore the result.
>>46613096
I would honestly recommend you watch Adam Koebel's office hours. The show has 7 episodes each about an our long, and he really provides some interesting insights which helped me start off more confidently as a GM.
>>46613208
Not that anon, but shit happens.
Level one is extremely deadly, and you DO need to DM around that.
But I've found that if you start pulling punches, you lose focus of what the party can / can't handle. If you never let them get in danger, they never get to shine. Necessity is the mother of invention, and you're removing necessity.
So we might be getting ready to play a gang themed game (think medieval gangs of new york) and I was trying to come up with a character.
Very specifically I want to play some kind of shitkicker. I don't have much beyond that besides I want to play a guy who can serve as a kind of muscle or as a very loud hitman. My gut tells me to make a big muscly guy but at the same time I can't really picture him wearing plate mail and I want him to be able to do shit like fight off 3 guys with a table knife after he was jumped in the bathtub.
To me this screams a few things and I was hoping for input
Barbarian: Its got the light armored strong guy thing pretty down and is probably my leading guy. I might want to reflavor rage and totems though, I don't feel like I want this guy being a screaming or even overtly angry guy and he sure as hell isn't going to have some kind of closer to nature shit going on
Finesse fighter: Again fits the able to fight even when caught off guard thing, though the lack of muscle doesn't quite fit the image I have in my head. Maybe I'll give him a vestigial 12 strength just so he can be a little buff
Monk: Again like barbarian not quite the normal flavor. Specifically I'm picturing a skilled knife fighter who just happens to have a bit of an edge over others (e.g. he has ki abilities)
Evocation wizard: Okay this ones the odd duck out. But I think it would be hilarious for "the muscle" to walk into a room and it be an 8 strength wizard who's REALLY good at casting fireballs
Ranger and rogue aren't off the table yet but again I really want this guy to be an asskicker first.
I'm also trying to avoid falling in to the hole of my only abilities being face stomping, since I see way too many fighters sitting on their hands when anything but combat happens
>>46613208
Yes, actually it is. Having a low-level antagonist roll well sets and early expectation that combat is dangerous and dramatic.
>>46613219
Why spend time flipping through the rulebooks, then fudge your rolls? Because you want all the squishy hugbox lack of PC risk and for the pace of play to grind down to nothing at the same time?
>>46613208
If you wanna freeform, go freeform.
>>46613284
I'd personally go for the refluffed monk. Monks are the only class that can do significant damage with a dagger, and you can go with the Long Death monk from SCAG to make him extra beefy.
>>46613033
>>46613073
>>46613078
>>46613121
Okay. That's very strange to me, because advantage on saving throws against being blinded does provide advantage on the saving throw against Sunbeam and Sunburst, thus increasing the likelyhood that the target will take less damage. This is both RAW by the book and confirmed RAI by the answers guy on twitter. It's undeniably how the interaction is meant to work.
Saying then that something even more resilient against being blinded, being completely immune, would have no advantage or ability to resist the damage as a creature who merely has advantage on the saving throw is what is weird to me. Upgrading resistance to immunity should be a resistance in all respects, not just some, right? Why does the resistant thing take less damage, but the immune thing takes full?
>>46613352
>Monks are the only class that can do significant damage with a dagger
Rogues.
>>46613396
>Upgrading resistance to immunity should be a resistance in all respects, not just some, right?
*should be an upgrade in all respects
>>46613396
>because advantage on saving throws against being blinded does provide advantage on the saving throw against Sunbeam and Sunburst
[citation needed]
That's exactly not how I would run those spells in conjunction with such a condition resistance.
>>46613309
How about you learn the fucking rules before playing? Besides, none of them are hard to find and on top of it 5e is a simple system.
>>46613439
>[citation needed]
Sure thing: https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/705095647486062594
>>46613462
It's anon's first time playing, must less running, the game. It's likely he doesn't have 100% system mastery. What if he runs into one of the strange nuanced questions that we belabor all day on these very /5eg/ threads? Should he crack the books open and spend a half hour looking for a nonexistent definitive rule? No, he should make a call on-the-fly, let play continue apace, and double back later to make sure he gets it right next time.
>>46613509
That answer doesn't specifically address the damage, just that and Ettin's Two Heads feature isn't negated by the presence of a damaging element.
Also I am generally opposed to twtter-as-rules-reference. If the book is somehow unclear, it's on the DM. We shouldn't make it standard practice to expect every DM at every table to pour through Crawford's electronic diarrhea.
>>46613396
Ettin's explicitly have an ability granting advantage on saving throws to be blinded.
Sunbeam is a saving throw to avoid being blinded, AND...
But we don't care about the and. It's a saving throw to avoid being Blinded, so they get advantage.
Resistance and Immunity have no such interaction. You are immune to the Blinded condition, which is different from being immune to effects that cause blindness.
How do we make a martial class that's as interesting as a caster class? Is weeaboo fightan magic the only way?
>>46613731
It's very difficult in the design space DnD's combat system gives us to use.
>>46613731
Go back to 4e type attacks
Ctulhufag/Lord Nomic here again. I redid on of my earlier homebrews, the deep sea mermaid, in 5th edition. Contains both NPC stats and a playable version (not that the latter one is in any way practical, but I like presenting both a creature's statblock and a way to play as one, if it's reasonably possible).
I'm toying with the idea of somehow doing stats for the male version (which, like in many anglerfish is supposed to be tiny and attached to the female) as well.
>>46613801
That would be cool alright. 4e's robust combat system was definitely a perk.
I'm going to be starting a loose, friendly campaign of either 5e or 3.5 with some of my coworkers(most new to d&d as well) and I've been reading the phbs and tip guides but I still don't have a feel for the game that well.
What should I expect for my first few sessions, and how do I actually go about making an interesting & useful character?
>>46613801
>>46613756
>>46613731
If casters get a 99% monopoly on utility, martials should get a 99% monopoly on movement. Maybe give martials a lot more mobility, and ways to force the enemy to move. Let them play a positioning game.
>>46613731
Give them abilities that are cool and useful outside of combat as well as in combat.
The lvl6 4 player party in my campaign are breezing through encounters that the game classifies as "deadly". I am afraid to push them further since I do not want to hit too hard and get them killed. Any tips?
>>46613924
How many encounters do they have between short and long rests?
>>46613601
>That answer doesn't specifically address the damage, just that and Ettin's Two Heads feature isn't negated by the presence of a damaging element.
It doesn't have to, everything needed to understand the intended effect is there in the answer.
"On a failed save, a creature takes 6d8 radiant damage and is blinded until your next turn. On a successful save, it takes half as much damage and isn’t blinded by this spell." - Sunbeam
On a good save, the creature is not blinded AND takes half damage. It is one save that covers both effects, and the ettin has advantage on it. And he explains that this applies to all saves that impose any of the effects listed in the Two Heads trait, including blinded.
This was all pretty clear to me just by looking at the book (remember I was originally asking about immunity, not resistance), but the player refused the ruling I made and wouldn't talk to anyone at the table for several minutes after. Showing him the official answer only made him angrier.
>>46613714
>You are immune to the Blinded condition, which is different from being immune to effects that cause blindness.
Alright. When explained this way, I think I can understand.
Thanks guys.
>>46613943
No more than a couple. The campaign is not really focused on combat and having 4+ fights in one session means this is pretty much all we will do.
>>46613731
I think martials are plenty interesting. If you're looking to make them more rigid on what they can do you can implement an attack system similar to 4e's as >>46613801suggested
But again, as it is a martial character already works really well IMO
What 4e martial skills would you like? Maybe it's something that can already be done and you just haven't realized
>>46613924
This is usually because you have too few monsters going on in your encounters. By way of example: if you send a level 10 NPC at your party, even if he can one shot them all, if they beat the initiatave and get a hold person off, he's dead, and hes done.
CR is a fantastic tool for estimating difficulty when the numbers of combatants on each side are roughly equal. Not so much when one is lopsided.
anyone know of any good 5e streams/podcasts?
>>46613924
Are you taking full advantage of all abilities?
How do you design encounters? Lots of little guys? One big guy? Small group of medium guys?
If you're positive you're doing a good job at those bump up the cr higher.
You have any example encounters?
>>46613999
critical role?
>>46613984
I'm thinking of my players for the most part. They cant stand martial classes, because time after time, the martial class goes "well, I hit it with my pike real hard", while the wizards and bards and what not are causing plants to turn into spikes, fire to reign down from the heavens, etc, etc.
Battlemaster is sort of a step in the right direction, but it's not good enough.
>>46613961
>but the player refused the ruling I made and wouldn't talk to anyone at the table for several minutes after.
Sounds like the immunity question isn't the real problem at hand here.
>>46613924
Present them with the challenges that make sense for the setting you've put them in. If they breeze through them, fine. If they get their asses killed, that's fine too. The encounter building guidelines are there to help DMs that are scared of accidentally challenging their players. Clearly this need not be a problem for you.
Im going to run Out of the Abyss on thursday. Are there any articles/tip/whatnot that could help me out as DM for ideas and stuff?
>>46613995
>>46614010
I suppose I should try to get my encounters more saturated with little guys. Thanks.
Rolled 15, 18, 8, 14, 6, 8 = 69 (6d20)
Friendly reminder that the superior method of stats generation is exploding d20 down the line.
Now behold the glory of the chargen supreme.
>>46604740
posted this shit in /wbg/ but its slow, and its relevent here too. Im planning a campaign that begins in this desert that i've created. bbeg is going to be a baddie trying to become a lich. maybe have a wyrm he animates as a boss.
the map is a wip and im open to tips and suggestions.
the 2nd part of the campaign will be south east, on a hostile equatorial jungle island which i have also started a map on after getting burnt out on the desert map.
Rolled 17, 16, 14, 19, 17, 2 = 85 (6d20)
>>46614092
>Not picking your class and race before the rollsOrc Wizard
>>46614114
jung map.
trying to find a way to visualize thick rainforest vegetation that looks nice with the rest of the map.
Rolled 13, 8, 3, 10, 20, 5 = 59 (6d20)
>>46614116
Surprisingly apt.A human fighter.
Rolled 1 (1d20)
>>46614140
>3 CON
>3 fucking CON
WIS through the roof!
>>46614092
Starting this shit again
>>46614131
where my img tho
>>46614114
>Da'Ru'De desert
Please die.
