File: cool cat.jpg (40 KB, 600x464) Image search: [Google]

40 KB, 600x464

>Old thread
>>48315342

I generally allow most of the "actions in combat" stuff. Cleave Through Creatures is usually forgotten and no one bothers to understand what Marking does.

>>48334032
>What variant rules from the DMG do you use or like the most?
I like flanking but I feel like it's way more often worse for the party than beneficial, since 5e has alot of encounters and alot of enemies per the average encounter.

>>48334052
being new to DnD i was wondering why they didnt have a feat for Cleave? I can see something akin to GWM where you -5 to hit and your attacks get to hit everything 5 feet in front of you

>>48334123
GWM is both Power Attack and Cleave in design--you get a bonus action attack when you drop a creature to 0.

>>48334138
true but I was thing more consistent AoE like that skill that rangers have but i suppose they have to make ranger unique that way

>>48334167
Martials aren't designed with aoe in mind as a focus. That job is supposed to be relegated more to the casters.

>>48334052
>no one bothers to understand what Marking does.
Marking is annoying to me. Basically you have the same player declaring a mark over and over until combat ends. How dynamic.

>>48334184
Which makes sense I think. Cleave powers are pretty retarded if you actually think about how that would possibly work (inb4 the gif from the movie)

>>48334032
My campaign uses a rule where being reduced to 0 hit points inflicts a level of exhaustion each time it happens. It's working great.

So I'm never played 5e, but I have a game in a few weeks, and was just wondering how Sorcerers are compared to older editions and such, which I wasn't hugely fond of.

File: 1450335976362.jpg (155 KB, 830x498) Image search: [Google]

155 KB, 830x498

Posting over in this thread.
I'm using a magic trinket won in a lottery as motivation for the party to solve a time-sensitive situation in order to pick up said winning before it is forfeited.
I'm looking for ideas for what it could be. Something for level 3 characters.
>Prize in a lottery from Morgrave University in Sharn, so the item should have little value or use in academia
>Item is a relic retrieved from Xen'Drik being lottoed as a better fundraiser than auctioning it
>Could be considered to be of little worth due to an ability that is too obscure to be of use, like +5 to checks to find mundane rocks or bark, or have an unknown ability that could be reactivated by installing a dragonshard in the item's empty center
>Should be shiny enough to motivate their action

My party should be entering a marsh soon. I'm under the impression travelling there with horses should be more or less impossible, since a description of the place says "The ground is what passes for dry in the mere: even “solid ground” is soggy, with water very near the surface." Am I correct to assume a horse might start sinking into the ground or break an ankle or something of the sort?

>>48334242
Yeah, I like the 5e role allocation design decisions of how each class generally fits in a party.
Encourages class diversity a whole lot more than in previous editions, which is more fun I think. Got different people doing different things rather than multiple people doing the same thing.

>>48334290
They play alright. They're considered the weakest of the full casters (not due to damage output but due to spells known limiting their utility) but they're also the only class that gets metamagic shenanigans, which gives them extra flexibility when it comes to casting the spells they know.

They're fine.

>>48334301
shallow draft boats are what you want to use in most marshes.

>>48334290
They're pretty good, not the best, but useful. Easy to make interesting given their backstories are automatically weird and mysterious, and casting isn't super special or anything. You also have the opportunity to make them the talky one if that's your thing. Just about any combat focused class is viable in this edition.

>>48334301
Yeah, look up the battle of Agincourt. Player characters should get penalties to movement at the very least, and swamps are a good way to give your PCs annoying diseases. I'd recommend introducing a village where some locals offer to guide them through in exchange for money, which can circumvent a lot of hassle. If they don't take them up on their offer then punish them.

>>48334290

They're fine. If you at least liked the old metamagic stuff sorcerers are the only ones who can do that now, and it's a lot of fun. Maximzed fireball is always a good time.

>>48334301

It's likely that not ALL the ground is impassable - after all, it's not like soggy ground means a human will sink into it. Neither will a horse. It will, however, make travel much slower and harder for both the people and the horses unless they're on relatively firm trails.

>>48334299
It locates giants. Practicallly worthless (not to mention powerless) outside of Xendrik. Outside of that, it looks fucking swank, the money goes to a good cause, and having won the lottery is prestige in itself.

However, I'd just fiat that your players spent a pool of money granted to them by superiors in their midst so as to rub elbows with high society. this adds an extra plot hook of not fucking up a job your boss assigned to you.

The more I get into DnD the more I wish multi-classing was better. Especially how the feats/ability score increases are not tied to player level like proficiency.

I was planning out a psychic cavalier and it'd be dipping into Warlock(3), Paladin(5) and then the rest in Cavalier Fighter which would mess my progression up, especially if I went from level one. Though this is also an issue of find steed being a lv2 Paladin only(naturally)spell.

I feel like there must of been some better way to have multiclass work when right now its better to just homebrew a few things(like Warlock Chain pact giving a single steed)than actually multiclass since outside of one rogue level it seems really iffy.

Unless I'm wrong and multi-classing can be used very well.

>>48334462
>The more I get into DnD the more I wish multi-classing was better.
5e multiclassing only exists because the wails of Munchkins would rise to the heavens.

With the archetypes, there's absolutely no cause to multiclass besides trying to mechanically twink some broken amount of burst damage out of your "character".
I say "character", because the people who build such garbage inevitably put 99% of their thought into their combo mechanics rather than playing anything that is entertaining around the table.
/end rant.

File: Margret2.jpg (77 KB, 640x457) Image search: [Google]

77 KB, 640x457

>>48334387
I guess I just find it strange that sorcerers are the good metamagic users now. What Origins do you guys like? I heard there was a stormborn origin, which fits my character idea, how is it?

>>48334462
>Warlock(3), Paladin(5)
Case in point; Munchkin 101, a stupid damage combo that's commonly played by unimaginative power-gamers.

>>48334290
Sorcerers are a bit worse than all the other full casters, but they're still good.
I wish they'd get just a minor tweaking - it wouldn't take all that much to put them next to the others.

>>48334508
Fluff-wise it's a Forgotten Realms thing, though of course that's adaptable.
But if you mean "is it tough", then yes, it's pretty strong.

>>48334462

Multiclassing has always been pretty weird in D&D I agree. I think they tied feats/ability score increases to your class levels in 5E to stop the deluge of like fighter 5/samurai 2/wizard 3/mind melter 6 multi class shenanigans of yesteryear.

Multiclassing CAN work quite well (e.g. barbarian/rogue, monk/rogue, fighter/paladin, etc) it's just that you need a fairly clear idea of where you're going and probably don't want to much further than 4 or 5 in your splash IMO. A splash of one level into many classes can prove beneficial in many ways, whether that's for some increased flexibility or more proficiencies or just some interesting RP.

>>48334508

They wanted to distinguish between the caster classes so sorcerers got the sort of flexible magic. As for origins, I really like the charlatan for fun. You get to make up a whole new identity for your character to inhabit, and it just generally offers a lot of fun RP choices.

>>48334508
1st: You learn Primordial

1st: Immediately after casting a 1st or higher level spell, you can fly up to 10 feet without provoking.

6th: Resist lightning, thunder. Whenever you cast a 1st or higher level spell that deals lightning or thunder, creatures of your choice within 10 feet of you take lightning or thunder damage equal to half sorc level.

6th: Minor weather control; stop the rain within 20 feet of you, or choose wind direction within 100 feet of you.

14th: When hit by a melee attack, reaction to deal lightning damage equal to sorc level to attacker. They make a Str save vs. 20 foot push.

18th: Immune to lightning, thunder. Gain fly 60. Once per rest, can cut it to fly 30 to give up to 3+cha creatures fly 30 for one hour.

>>48334549
>or just some interesting RP.
That's what Backgrounds are for. Let's not kid ourselves, people dip into other classes to stack abilities. It really makes me wonder if the people who do this simply can't find enough gamers who want to play Pathfinder.

>>48334462
Multiclassing sacrifices depth of ability for breadth of ability. You give up the strongest abilities of one class for the multiple less-powerful abilities of two (or more) classes. And yes, that includes ability score improvements--you sacrifice raising your stats in exchange for class features.

The only area where 5e multiclassing actively fails is Extra Attack. 4 of the 12 core classes get it but get nothing from multiclassing into one of the other classes with it up to 5th level. Paladin, ranger, and barbarian can be fine--they get higher-level spells or fast movement that level--but fighter 5 on top of any other martial class is a waste.

>>48334568
>Pathfinder
Yo homie I see your wizard and raise you a wizard. Now we wizards up in da wizards doin wizard shiiiieeeeeet.

>>48334593
>Multiclassing grants early nova-damage ability on the basic presumption that everyone will get tired of the game and drop out before 11th level.

Fix'd that for you.

>>48334593
Fighters are fucking disgustingly tasty in gestalt though.
Mmmmmmm.

>>48334568

Sure some folks do, and I've seen others who do it for flavor reasons. If it gets you that bothered then run a home game and ban multiclassing.

>>48334568
I figure that stable and ongoing campaigns got so rare after the 90s that for the next 20 years the game /is/ the build. See also the thousandth iteration of the CYOA generals (there are two of them).

>>48334497
The only multi-class option I've ever seen "agreed" upon to be good is one level into rogue for Expertise.

>>48334520
That's the annoying part for this character build, since those levels are not for damage at all but purely for flavor(warlock)and Find Steed from Paladin.

Which made me realize how pointless multi-classing was when I could just get Find Steed to be a level 1 spell or have it be a Warlock Pact Chain Familiar.

>>48334549
I didn't play the other editions so that makes sense but it still seems to be an odd choice when proficiency and other formula is tied to character level but it isn't.

My psychic cavalier required talking to his horse for flavor so homebrewing warlock to work with that(with only a 3 level dip)makes more sense than having to put in a ton of Paladin levels.

At least it seems like capstone abilities are not really as amazing as in other RPG's I've seen so losing out on a few isn't a big deal.

>>48334661
When you reduce the campaign to dungeon runs with metagame munchkin builds, you've take the first step to having a brief one.

That said, I'm an older DM who runs for players nearing 30yrs of age, I've never tried running for kids with the attention span of a gnat.

>>48334673
>At least it seems like capstone abilities are not really as amazing as in other RPG's I've seen so losing out on a few isn't a big deal.

Generally yea. I think the Barbarian one is fucking hilarious, but I've also never hit level 20 in D&D so I wouldn't worry about it that much.

>>48334563
Thanks, I just got it from the trove myself.
>>48334531
I'm a-ok with them not being top-tier casters, I'm making this character from a more RP stance than mechanical. but obviously it's nice if both sides are good.

>>48334673
>The only multi-class option I've ever seen "agreed" upon to be good is one level into rogue for Expertise.

Feat ______ Mastery. You gain Expertise in said skill, and 1 point in the primary attribute most associated with that Skill.

See you really don't need to multiclass at all.

File: a874550f26faa88e9bf0aa7df232fd2c61202daf.jpg (89 KB, 800x600) Image search: [Google]

89 KB, 800x600

hey guys dm here, for my campaign there are Djinn's, and I want this wizard NPC going around and capturing them like pokemon for him and the other "trainers" to battle them in this underground elemental fighting arena/game that they do as a secret club kind of thing

my question is, how does my wizard get these djinn in these objects exactly? are there rules to this? or did I miss something in my MM?

>>48334609
>Multiclassing grants early nova-damage ability on the basic presumption that the DM's planned encounters will crumble at the superior build, however the DM will be able to realize and counter the min-maxer's higher-than-stratosphere damage before other players can get to a similar level of utility and effectively contribute, but at some point the non-minmaxed characters will have died due to the heavily increased encounter power and the autist who abused multiclassing will have a sperg rage because the DM has "targeted" him based on the fact that he can no longer breeze through encounters and "beat" the DM, therefore the game will end before the other players finally get some sweet powers at 11th level.

Revised. Thoughts?

>>48334719
I've always loved sorcerer fluff. I played them in 3.5 and Pathfinder despite objectively being worse than wizards just for that. That's part of why it depresses me, if only a little, that they can't quite be on the same level as the rest in this edition. They definitely closed the gap between classes *ALL AROUND*, but damnit I wanted sorcerer to have its mechanical day in an edition so bad.

>>48334721
You'd think that would be a feat in the book.

>>48334757
>min-maxer's higher-than-stratosphere damage
Person who doesn't understand 5e go and please stay go.

>>48334725
He's an NPC. He can do whatever you (the DM) want him to do).

>>48334757
That sounds pretty much spot-on.
I love the guys who try to convince me that their "background concept totally makes sense for a Warlock/Paladin", when everyone knows it's just for bullshit smiting and the like.

I do not allow any multiclassing at my table, but then I had quality players who weren't interested in it in the first place.

>>48334763
It's what's heavily suggested here: https://media.wizards.com/2016/downloads/DND/UA-Feats-V1.pdf
Keep in mind that such feats (skill, not tool) are very boring. And take away from the rogue and bard's somewhat unique niches.

>>48334769
It's a joke, boss. It's more in reference to older editions than this one anyway.

>>48334769
>If you aren't doing triple the damage of a single-class character, YOU JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND THE RULZ!"
Tha/tg/uy detected.

>>48334806
>triple damage
>5e
gapsg

>>48334787
Meh. I'm okay with a player trying some stuff out, as long as they actually try to fit ONE role and not ste on the other player's toes. We're all supposed to be having some fun here.

>>48334806
That's not what he was saying at all, bub.

>>48334789
>Keep in mind that such feats (skill, not tool) are very boring.

The guy taking them wants to be super-Acrobatic. Or super-knowledgeable about History. Or something. To him, it's not boring.

>And take away from the rogue and bard's somewhat unique niches.

They already get multiple Expertise, and the rogue has an extra Feat, so he can Expertise beyond his basic 4 and become incredibly proficient. The Stealth-Expert Halfing Ranger doesn't steal the Thief's thunder in any way, and that's not even considering the Thief's higher level enhancements like taking 10 automatically.

>>48334787
I'll be honest when I originally made my post about fighter/paladin/warlock I had no idea warlock/paladin smiting combo was a thing.

I just really like find steed.

>>48334853
I don't believe you, but you aren't in my game, so I don't care that much.

>>48334833
The feat itself is very boring.
But so is resilience, or skilled or tough I suppose. Or the attribute increase it's replacing. All fairly boring.
In regard to your ranger example in particular, I'd just take a level (or more) in rogue at some point if you're going for a super-stealth character concept. You can maintain the very same fluff while gaining a bit more than you lose, given what rangers get at later levels isn't all that impressive.

>>48334874
This conversation is reminding me of GURPS with its general abilities and specific abilities costing different amounts of points for equal utility. That game's character creation is so fucking annoying.

>>48334865
The oddest part of not believing that is in multiple of my posts I said it'd make no sense to go warlock/paladin for my character over just homebrew for Find Steed.

Since Fighter 12, Paladin 5 and Warlock 3 would be a really bad build for what I wanted to do.

>>48334901
Why are you even bothering with a retard who is circlejerking about imaginary munchkins?

>>48334874
Not every feat needs to grant you three separate abilities (which can hopefully combo somehow with other abilities). You find Feats boring that aren't "powerful".

>I'd just take a level (or more) in rogue
So your answer to "not stepping on the Rogues' toes" is to actually take levels in Rogue to get some of their cool abilities. Okay.

>>48334893
Yes it is. And my first tabletop *EVER* was GURPS. It's no wonder I turned into a book-diver rules-junkie after that bs.

>>48334915
No it doesn't. As I state. It is, however, boring.
>You find Feats boring that aren't "powerful"
Shut the fuck up nigger, don't strawman me.

If you're going to be a skillmonkey, take levels in the skillmonkey shit. Especially when the skill-monkey levels are better than your Legolas levels.

>>48334913
>imaginary munchkins
>Plotting out his character progression to 20th level see:
>>48334901
Okay whatever.

>>48334929
That's not munchkinning you fucking retard, that's common sense.

>>48334927
>don't strawman me.
So what feats DO you like that aren't combat reaction/bonus actions or +10 to damage?

Because all the ones you listed are useful Feats that give useful bonuses.
It's not a Strawman if it's the truth.

File: 1379520578766.png (153 KB, 405x405) Image search: [Google]

153 KB, 405x405

>>48334945
No, creating a 1st level character with the preset map for being a multi-class combo of specific levels is not "common sense", it's min-maxing.

File: maxresdefault[1].jpg (108 KB, 1920x1080) Image search: [Google]

108 KB, 1920x1080

>>48334032
>Are the MtG supplements any good?
>Do they just cover mechanics, or fluff too?
>Do they do a good job covering planeswalkers?
Curious about this new MtG D&D thing, and wondering if it's good enough to start playing 5e for MtG campaigns.

>>48334968
Considering that it doesn't fucking work and you end up with a useless sack of shit character if you don't do it right, no, it's common sense to plan things ahead when you want to try a concept that a single class doesn't cover.

>>48334950
I love Inspiring Leader, Healer, Magic Initiate, Lucky for starters that don't satisfy your arbitrary criteria. I don't know in what world you think I implied expertise +1 attribute bonus "isn't useful". I never said it wasn't *anywhere* you stupid shit. I said it was fucking boring, just like a +2 to a stat that any feat replaces is also fucking boring.

>>48334993
Like I said, why are you bothering with someone who's circlejerking over an imaginary bogeyman?

>>48334968
Not if you've played 3.x before.

You have to do that in 3.x if you're going to play the kind of character you want to play. I can understand how someone might think that carries over into other RPGs if that's where most of your experience comes from.

Not sure how applicable it is to 5 though.

>>48334988
You are confusing "Power set" with "Character concept".
You aren't building a "character", you are building a kill-bot that kills things effectively, chummo.

>>48334997
I don't know. I'm being baited successfully. Super-anti-op retards trigger me.

>>48334945
Your level 1 Fighter knows he's going to one day make a pact with an otherworldly entity to be rewarded arcane power and swear an oath of justice to be granted divine magic?

What happens when the DM doesn't present those options to you? Did you forget the game was controlled by a DM whilst fingering your book?

>>48334984
>Any good?
I think so. Some people hold that the Innistrad one sucks, but I think it did the job it wanted to do.

>Mechanics or just fluff?
Mostly fluff, and a lot of "mechanics" are just "use the stats for this existing thing, but change this one thing", but there's some good shit in there, and the fluff is DELICIOUSO

>Planeswalkers?
Not present at all. Nor is 5-colour magic. These books are for playing the worlds as a D&D setting, not for using D&D to play Magic. I expect if they stay popular, a 5-colour magic splatbook will appear.

>>48335005
>Not if you've played 3.x before.
Why would I possibly be discussing anything related to 3.whateverthefuck in a 5e general?

What would possibly make you think I was talking about multiclassing in reference to 3.x in the first place?

>>48335006
>You are confusing "Power set" with "Character concept".
>next fucking sentence you do exactly that
Are you for fucking real?

File: 1434933106787.gif (919 KB, 170x196) Image search: [Google]

919 KB, 170x196

So we're doing cures of Strahd and honestly I've got no real drive to play anything for whatever reason. What's some fun classes/ combinations /tg/? We have a barbarian, a cleric, a (greatweapon melee?)bladelock, and I have no idea what to do. Suggestions would be appreciated.

>>48335006
NTGB but
>Massive Stormwind Fallacy.
Seriously.

If your character idea isn't covered by a single class, plotting out the class progression you plan on taking is reasonable.

Character concept is a different subject entirely, and of course he should also design a decent character rather than a bland cardboard cutout.

>itt: retards, strawmen and triggered niggers

>>48335027
Are you illiterate? Go reread my post and reply again once you figure out what it says. Sound out the words if you need to, I'll be here.

>>48335028
Warlock Paladins and Assassin combo characters aren't character concepts. They are munchkin setups for doing explosive amounts of damage in combat. That isn't a "character concept", it's an ill-justified excuse to min-max damage.

Are you playing with semantics or honestly stupid?

>>48335033
Ranger/rogue/bard/monk/paladin/fighter/druid/wizard/sorcerer would all fit fine. Your current three leave your option really wide open.

>>48335044
>Warlock Paladins and Assassin combo characters aren't character concepts.
[citation needed]

>>48335026
>Good Setting fluff.
Well that's nice.

>No 5 Color Magic, or Planeswalkers.
Ah. That's too bad.

>I expect if they stay popular, a 5-colour magic splatbook will appear.
I hope so!

>>48334787
I don't know man, feylock and green paladin multiclass is pretty damn flavorful.

>>48335034
>If your character idea isn't covered by a single class,
If your character idea isn't covered by a single class + an archetype you are either trying to be too special a snowflake, min-maxing, or just bad at building characters.

Give me an example of a character concept that NEEDS multi-classing to work at all.
>>48335042
Translate it from autist for me.

>>48335023
Fluff is mutable. End of discussion.

>>48335044
>vengeance paladin/assassin isn't someone's character concept
And to begin with, it's not even that fucking good. You jump one enemy, once per combat, and you need to be able to sneak all the way up into melee to actually pull it off.
Retards are too fucking triggering. I need a safe space from this shit.

>>48335069
This is what you get for Wizards pandering to these kinds of players during the playtest.

>>48335069
>vengeance paladin/assassin isn't someone's character concept
No they aren't, they are forum garbage created by someone who feels they "created the maximum damage guy", and as you admit, it's not "that fucking good" meaning there are better min-maxes for damage out there.

It's not an idea for a neat character, it's pushing the rules for Super-Effectiveness, and then straining to fluff it up into half making sense.

>>48335103
You heard the man, Divine Batman isn't an idea for a neat character.

>>48335081
"Oh god how dare someone want to make a character who can do something that might be considered kind of but not super unique by mixing class levels! Min-max OP get out of my games I bet you can't even roleplay!"
Where do these people even come from? What is the trigger to make someone hate anyone who talks about game mechanics for the rest of their life?

>>48335063
>Translate it from autist for me.
I'll try to use small words for you.

>>48335005
>If play 3e, don't plan dude, dude suck.
>Bad Time.
>Learn to plan out dude so not suck.
>Play new game.
>Keep use learned thing with new game, so dude not suck.
>Not see you don't have to now.
Understand now? Sorry if my accent is a little thick, unfortunately I don't speak retard.

>>48335023
The pact could've been made long ago in the backstory and only at level 2 does the character decide to cash in and sign the dotted line.

>>48335044
>Warlocks, Paladins, and Assassins can only work the way I think they do and there's no possible way they could somehow meet in the middle

>>48335063
>>48335103
...

Y'all are being too extreme. Being an extremist is what makes people blow themselves up.
Physically and emotionally.

>>48335103
>No they aren't
What is an inquisition assassin.
Holy shit where do you people spawn from?

Multiclassing only exists in 5e, where you can already archetype an Arcane Knight, spellcasting rogue, ect. ect. because they knew a certain type of player (3. guy) wouldn't even look at the new edition without it.

>>48335137
>If play 3e, don't plan dude, dude suck.
>Bad Time.
THIS

It is not even remotely uncommon for someone to accidentally fuck themselves in 3.5. Multiclassing in 5E is no different.

>>48335063
A young man comes into contact with a fey lord and enters his service. Over the course of his adventuring career he decides to go even further and serve his lord as a green knight.

Would this not be best represented by starting as a feylock and eventually multiclassing into oath of ancients paladin?

>>48335065
In TTRPGs, fluff is more important than mechanics.

>>48335060
Sure. The guy who swore himself to a chaotic fey he barely knows is also an upholder of justice who fey are afraid of.

File: carl.png (53 KB, 790x1010) Image search: [Google]

53 KB, 790x1010

>>48334916
I love the shit out of that system but man is it painful to explain to newbies how garbage their first character is.
>But anon, I just want to be a guy who is good at punching. He's a boxer.
>I know, but you can be good at all martial arts stuff if you take this general ability with less relative point loss!
>But anon... why would they even have these specific skills if they cost so much more in comparison?
>...It don't matter. None of this matters.

>>48334988
That's fair I guess but just laying out what it looks like at 20 is weird regardless of what kind of player you are. Shouldn't you be laying out what it looks like incrementally from the campaign's start? Even then, unless you start at high level then your concept revolves around becoming what you want, as opposed to reacting based on what you are, which is a weird way to play a roleplaying game.

>>48335148
I can play a Fighter/Mage/Thief, a Fighter/Mage/Cleric, and a Cleric/Thief in AD&D, none of which have archetypes for them in 5E.

You can fuck right off with your dumb "BAWWW MOMMY THEY CARED ABOUT THE MECHANICS IT'S TRIGGERING ME!!!!" bullshit.

File: DaVinciCode.jpg (57 KB, 320x479) Image search: [Google]

57 KB, 320x479

>>48335142
>What is an inquisition assassin.
A character from a Dan Brown novel?

Are you telling me that lots of people want to suddenly play Dan Brown characters for the exciting background? Neither of us are that stupid, so stop being disingenuous. We both know why they want to play assassin fucking paladins.
You aren't gaining ground by pretending to be obtuse.

>>48335155
>In TTRPGs, fluff is more important than mechanics.
No, never.

>>48335155
>In freeforum RP
fixed it for ya

>>48335162
>...It don't matter. None of this matters.
Heh. GURPS is sadly very very ivory-tower-esque. One of the reasons I love 5e so much is that it's so incredibly difficult to actually fuck up your character, and the mechanics are very easy for beginners to understand and get into.

>>48335063
>Be Lawful Neutral Paladin of Vengeance
>Have personal flaw: lust for power
>Swear fealty to archdevil in exchange for arcane power
>Become Lawful Evil
>Optionally become Oathbreaker

Nigga do you even

>>48335155
>All fey are chaotic because I just assume they are
>I don't understand how the Seelie/Unseelie divide has any impact on that
>Fey beings can not be afraid of each other or their mortal agents
Nevermind, I see that you don't.

Damn, nigga.

>>48335162
>Even then, unless you start at high level then your concept revolves around becoming what you want, as opposed to reacting based on what you are, which is a weird way to play a roleplaying game.
People who plot out 20th level roadmaps aren't in it for the Roleplaying.

>>48335155
>In TTRPGs, fluff is more important than mechanics.
See this shit right here?

This is how you get WoD and Exalted, where it's ridiculously easy to make a character that doesn't work the way the game tells you. This is how you get 3.5 and its "Clerics are SUPPOSED to be stronger than Fighters at fighting because they've got magic!" brand of bullshit and how you get Truenamers, a class that objectively gets worse at what it's supposed to do when you go up a level.

>>48335202
>Letting in Evil players
Not even once, even if you are buying drinks.

>>48335162
>I want to be the very best, like no one ever was. To catch them is my real test, to train them is my cause
>No, that's a stupid idea. You should change your dreams each time something happens.

>>48335178
People want to in Pathfinder, 3.5, Star Wars, Warhammer shit, Shadowrun - I don't know why you think a character type is taboo just because people have discussed a hypothetical buildpath for it before. Oh wait. Yes I do. It's because you're a rabid anti-op retard.

>>48335210
[citation needed]

>>48335155
>Fey are afraid of fey knights

I'm not seeing that anywhere in the oath of ancients section, so what are you basing that off of?

>>48335063
TL;DR if your 3.5 build wasn't meticulously planned across like five different prestige dips, you were just fucked. Grogs don't realize 5e doesn't require that, or they don't trust that that's actually true and not just shill speak, so they default to their old ways.

>>48335223
>I can't handle certain character concepts and I don't trust anyone around me to either
Yes, we already know

>>48335248
>Grogs don't realize 5e doesn't require that
It does if you are a making a multiclassed character, which is what we were discussing, which is something you'd know if you had an IQ higher than room temperature.

This. Shit. Isn't. Hard.

>>48335221
>>48335193
>>48335190
You are wrong, friends.

At any given point, the DM can just tear your plans of multiclassing apart. A DM can also just give you what you want without having to multiclass at all if you don't act like such a munchkin faggot.

With archetypes, feats and backgrounds, there is zero reason to multiclass unless your character in-story actually goes through some sort of shit that'd justify it, which is entirely controlled by a person that isn't you.

Sorry, though.

>>48335263
>At any given point, the DM can just tear your plans of multiclassing apart.
And a DM can kill a player arbitrarily or change the rules on a whim, but that's fucking retarded and has nothing to do with the discussion so the only person who cares about it is the person who's crying about other people knowing the rules.

>>48335240
Last night, your momma said you weren't able to keep a regular gaming group because you were a min-maxing faglord.
Call her and she'll provide citation.

>>48335247
>Turn the Faithless

You didn't look very hard.

>>48335252
To give him the benefit of the doubt, evil characters in good parties take at the very least some (and usually a lot) of extra work on the DM's part even (and actually usually especially) if the evil player in question is managing to play in such a way as to not out himself as actually being evil to the rest.

>>48335263
>Entirely controlled by a person who is not you
You have my deepest condolences on having only ever played with shit DMs, anon.

>>48335033
Rogue + Shadow Monk

>>48335275
Joke's on you, people beg me to play with them.

File: questionmark girl4.jpg (180 KB, 945x945) Image search: [Google]

180 KB, 945x945

>>48335210
>people who think about what classes their character might take in the future aren't in it for the roleplaying

>>48335282
Here you go

https://1d4chan.org/wiki/Golden_Rule

Welcome to /tg/, by the way.

File: Supahman.jpg (1 MB, 1270x1966) Image search: [Google]

1 MB, 1270x1966

>>48335248
This asshat plays everything in 3.5/3.P mode, and assumes you just suck at rules if you don't OP your character with some "sick combo" that "I've totally got a concept for".

I imagine he's the epitome of "That Guy" around the table, as he scoffs at the effectiveness of that "mere single classed thief".

His constant insulting makes it apparent that he's a gigantic asshole and not even generally aware of it.

>>48335307
In a recent story arc, one of my players, a Sun Soul monk, joined an ancient order of knights and wanted to multiclass into Oath of the Crown paladin. We looked at the multiclass rules, noped over the horizon, and sat down to think of better ideas.

Instead of multiclassing, we retrained him. He's now a Blade/Undying warlock, and loving it, because hit hits every note of the character he wanted to play; ki blasts, martial prowess, magical weapon/armour, anti-undead tech, and spellcasting.

While I don't think multiclassing is worthless, I do think nearly any concept can be worked into a single-class character with some creativity.

>>48335307
>I imagine he's the epitome of "That Guy" around the table, as he scoffs at the effectiveness of that "mere single classed thief".
Cool projecting.

>>48335280
That's hardly proof. Death clerics are pretty friendly with the undead, but they can still turn them. Nothing's stopping me from playing my FEY KNIGHT as a KNIGHT of the FEY. Or are you gonna start fluff lawyering me?

>>48335195
>GURPS is sadly very very ivory-tower-esque
You mean it's easy to fuck yourself into uselessness, like in 3.x? Isn't it obvious how to be good at the things you want to be good at in GURPS though?

>>48335210
Hello Mr. Stormwind. Lovely weather we're having today.

>>48335281
Evil characters can work fine in a neutral party though. Obviously you need to build to the group, but if the rest of the party is in the adventuring for the adrenaline rush, treasure hunting, and drinking; or they're in it as a business rather than a charity, that LE (or even NE) character might be a perfectly good ally, and interesting character in the party.

>>48335263
>Playing TTRPGs isn't a social game where everyone can have fun sharing a collective fantasy made from each individual's contributions
>instead, TTRPGs are an exercise in fellating the God-Creator of All Existence named "DM"

>>48335305
Yes, people who plot out every level progression so that they arrive at some specific confluence of powers/abilities are generally not putting much thought into playing a fleshed out Roleplaying character, but instead building a combat droid.
I have to assume you understand English, and aren't just parroting words with greentext back at me.

>>48335227
Really thought that one out, dipshit.
>Well we think Ash should re-consider his ultimate goal after performing poorly in several battles and realizing that he values friendship more than ownership with his Pokemon.
>No. Him catchy all da Pokemon, like da song.

>>48335339
>You mean it's easy to fuck yourself into uselessness, like in 3.x?
Yes, that's exactly what I mean.

>Isn't it obvious how to be good at the things you want to be good at in GURPS though?
After having been through the blender at a very young age and who learned quickly how I ought to go about actually making sure my characters can do what I want them to do, yes - I find it obvious. Many other people don't, unfortunately. Some people *NEVER* figure out that skill focus: underwater basket weaving is a bad idea no matter how much you tell them though. And for games like 3.x and GURPS, having those types in your games sucks dick.

>>48335345
>so that they arrive at some specific confluence of powers/abilities
This is all that a class is. Not understanding that is on you.

>>48335306
I did not mean "You can argue with the DM if you don't like their ideas or rulings."

I meant "I feel sorry for you because you have only ever played with restrictive DMs who don't allow their players any creative control, or their characters narrative agency, in a game of collaborative storytelling."

I just figured you were smart enough to know the difference. I was wrong. Thank you for helping me learn that, anon.

File: enchanted ring of engagement.jpg (186 KB, 780x704) Image search: [Google]

186 KB, 780x704

oi. Im thinking of running a game, a quick 1 shot, looking for 3 players level 1 to start off. Any takers?

>>48335342
>Unless you allow me to Warlock-Smite, you aren't supporting my collective fantasy!

And back into the pool of DM-less gamers you go.

>>48335281
People who think evil characters cannot play in a good campaign, or even in a good party are thinking along the same lines of Paladin Falls.

Every single character concept can work out if you collectively want it to.

>>48335306
A GM who consistently abuses the golden rule to fuck up your character is a shit GM, and you kick him the fuck out of your group, or don't let him run anymore, and someone else takes over.

>>48335339
I suppose. I tend to not like those kinds of parties, though that may be because other people often take a whole lot of liberty with their motivations and what shit around them they're willing to tolerate.

>>48335372
Using discord, reply to this post and ill share the link.

>>48335372
>tfw when foreverdm twice a week since the system came out
Interested. So goddamn interested. Specifics?

>>48335345
I plotted out all the sorcerer spells I'll be learning at each level in a game recently.
Am I "not interested in roleplaying"?

>>48335370
>restrictive DMs who don't allow their players any creative control,
WAH, I CAN'T USE THIS SPLATBOOK OR OPTIONAL RULE, YOU TRYANT-BASTARD!

Multi-classing is an optional rule. You aren't entitled to it. At all.

>>48335373
The fact that you're crying about 'minmaxers' in fucking 5E, of all the games out there, shows how sad of a person you are.

>>48335369
>so that they arrive at some specific confluence of powers/abilities
>This is all that a class is. Not understanding that is on you.
This, 100%.

>>48335374
Read the post again. I don't think it can't be done at all.

>>48335387
its a one shot, trying to recruit new players into a bigger campaign. This is more like a test run.

>>48335385
>>48335387

>>48335393
This.

File: tmp_2406-14686984580952141972194.png (3 MB, 1920x800) Image search: [Google]

3 MB, 1920x800

I'm running the final fight in the Mines of Phandelver tonight.

The players have found the Forge of Spells and I'm going to have them ambushed by giant spiders and bugbears as well as the Black Spider. He's going to offer then the lives of their Rogue who he's captured when she failed to assasinate him and the Dwarf Nundro RockSeeker, who he will have hanging over a chasm by spider webs, in exchange for the forge. If they refuse he will cut the threads ( they break fully in 1d4 rounds) and stand on the ceiling kiting them with webs as his bugbears pick them apart.

Any thoughts ? Am I being a Killer DM? The Rogue will be low HP but conscious so able to escape and the players are pretty healthy , 2 wizards , a cleric and another rogue.

>>48335390
Okay anon. You win this anonymous internet argument. Your e-peen is bigger than mine. Have fun with the rest of this thread.

>>48335393
Min-maxing is more or less expected in 3.letmesellyousomespatbooks.
It's fun watching people struggle so badly to do it in a system where multiclassing is optional to begin with. I'd rather they just hate 5e and go back to 3._

>>48335355
The theme song wasn't meant for Ash, it was meant for everyone posting on /vp/

Ash just wants to be a Pokemon Master, which is still very attainable. Performing poorly in several battles doesn't mean he hasn't also performed very well on several others.

>>48335372
Text or voice? Maps or mapless? Virtual tabletop or a discord dicebot?

>>48335390
So are feats. Good luck selling that one to players.

>>48335427
discord dicebot, voice, mapless.

https://discord.gg/2nUR2P3

>>48335370
Unfortunately, you missed the part where I said a DM can just give you your stupid talking horse if you're not a faggot. Which is the opposite of a restrictive DM. If only you spent as much time reading my post as you did the Book of Suggested Guidelines. He could go 1-20 as Fighter and not get a single fucking level in Paladin or Warlock and just ask for a horse familiar instead of a background or something. Or make it his character's journey to get a talking horse. You don't multiclass because you like a spell. How the fuck does your character even know of the spell? Fucking munchkins...

>>48335431
My players have yet to take a feat, despite regular encouragement.

>>48335439
Ah, nvm then. Can't talk.

>>48335454
unfortunate.

Any other takers?

>>48335440
Suggesting that a character get invested in the story with the GM, and doing some in-game undertaking for a benefit he could just use an optional rule he's ENTITLED TO to get it when he determines?

You must be new to Tha/tg/uy.

>>48335463
Pointbuy, rolled, or default array?

>>48335401
Its not that I misread, but that you come from a position that its inherently doomed to failure, and only by arduous work can it be made acceptable.

I could have done better to get that portion across.

>>48335495
Roll 4d6 drop lowest

>>48335496
Evil players are either "My Edgy Concept" or enjoy roleplaying assholes.
Neither contributes to, and in fact generally detracts from, the players around the table who desire a fantasy experience that is neither Edgy nor assholish.

Evil parties can be fun for a short-term lark, but I would never ask a non-evil party to put up with an evil adventuring companion.

>>48335423
>3.letmesellyousomespatbooks.
Hah, I like it.

>>48335423
>I'd rather they just hate 5e and go back to 3._
That's more or less what I did. Not because I desire the necessity of minmaxing, but I do want a lot more character customization than I get in 5e, and I'm willing to tolerate that minmaxing requirement to get it.

I come here to check on new releases, and discuss/hear about new fluff pieces.

Sometimes I also pick up 5e adventures and run them in 3.x.

>>48335485
Yeah, that's they don't add anything huge so we don't get the cluttered 3e bullshit.

Need more players for a game RIGHT NOW.

https://discord.gg/2nUR2P3

>>48335527
>Enjoy roleplaying assholes
What's wrong with that? I've had some great times come out of evil characters mixed in with non-evil ones. Even assholes often have something they want to protect.

>>48335470
Most GMs will say "okay, sure, you've worked up to it in-character, take the option in the book using your feat slot/next class levels.."

>>48335551
If you're just a jerk who fights Evil, you're not really Evil, you're just an asshole.
And that's totally ok. I was referring to the people who post on /tg/ who play "A vivisectionist who keeps a basement full of human experiments no one sane would want to see".

>>48335555
I've DMed a long time, and I would never make someone burn a class level or the equivalent of a class level feature if the guy wanted a damn horse he could communicate with.
This is a game where people are regularly rewarded with fantastical items far more useful than Mr Ed.

>>48335569
Evil can fight itself. Devils fighting Demons, and even the Demon fighting among themselves. And even if someone does want to play such a vivisectionist, they aren't realistically going to bring their basement with them, so that might end up being moot.

>>48335569
Sure, but a Lawful or Neutral Evil character can totally have a great story arc with a non-evil party. Sometimes there's a bigger evil to be dealt with that's threatening the evil character's home, or maybe travelling with the party is a way to meet his secret goals (violence? treasure?) without getting lynched. Maybe he just wants to kill off every other major power in the area so he can fill the vacuum himself.

Evil doesn't have to be obvious, Evil doesn't have to stab everyone they see and subvert every goal of the party, making everyone wonder why this guy even came along. Evil can be subtle, and Evil can be cunning.

>>48335551
>Enjoy Roleplaying Assholes
>I've had some great times come out of evil characters mixed in with non-evil ones.
Me too, dude.

Sometimes I'm the guy playing the evil PC. Sometimes I'm the GM and someone else is playing the evil PC. Sometimes I'm in a group with the Evil guy. On a couple occasions I ended up fighting the evil PC, and ended up killing him, or he killed me. On others, we became good friends despite his loose morals, because he was still heavily invested in the group/cause despite not being a good person.

>>48335569
And if you torture the enemy during interrogations, or kill the witnesses to party crimes to avoid trouble, or blow up the police station/garrison killing most of the guards in order to bust out the party? What about if you worship Asmodeus, and the campaign is about stopping demons from invading the world, and you hate the demons because chaos, not because evil?

Every time it made for an interesting story, and a good time.

>>48335609
Until they want to take random stableboys back with them as loot for their lab.
And honestly, "Demons and Devils vie for supremacy" isn't the sort of argument that the party Cleric or even the Barbarian is going to readily accept, they don't make alliances with either of them.

>>48335582
If all he wants is the horse then sure, that would probably be the best way to do it. Completely nixing an character building options probably isn't the way to do it either. At some point you might end up replacing so many class features that multi-classing would then become the better option

>>48335613
>tfw lawful evil half-orc paladin of vengeance, scouring the world of chaotic filth

>>48335582
I probably wouldn't either were I the GM, but many of the GM's I've gamed with take the approach of "if it's a published option, that's the only way you're getting /thing/. If it's not a published option, you're not getting /thing/."

I've had GMs tell me I can't cut a rope across a chasm using a rapier because "it can only do piercing damage", even after I pulled up proof on google that rapiers do in fact have edges.

>>48335569
I let people play evil characters. They tend to die pretty damn quick though. If you're gonna be evil you need to be Machiavellian or you're just going to create more and more enemies. If a player doesn't get that, they won't last long. I'm all for indulging a player or group that is trying to put some nefarious plan in motion but a lot of players (the ones you're referring to I assume) just pick certain alignments to disregard consequences without an understanding that disregarding something doesn't make it disappear.

>>48335626
I want my players to be heroes too but killing them for being retarded is more fun if they have a big "E" next to their name.

>>48335613
>Every time it made for an interesting story, and a good time.
For the Evil player, perhaps. If the rest of the party is Neutral enough to be able to live with it, and it's not a disruption to party coherence, fine.

But more often than not it's disruptive.

>>48335612
>Evil can be subtle, and Evil can be cunning.
People generally want subtly Evil players in their party about as much as they want Rogues who move ahead and pick from the treasure first.

>>48335626
They don't have to accept it. Odds are they will NEVER KNOW. Remember, this isn't 3.p with its Detect Evil at-will shit. All they have to know is that my blade is mighty, my vengeance is swift, and both of them on their side.

>>48335626
Accepting an argument like that isn't a necessity for keeping the party together. There are plenty of ways to make it work. They'll all be campaign/situation specific, but they can work.

>>48335649
>Sometimes I'm the guy playing the evil PC. Sometimes I'm the GM and someone else is playing the evil PC. Sometimes I'm in a group with the Evil guy. On a couple occasions I ended up fighting the evil PC, and ended up killing him, or he killed me. On others, we became good friends despite his loose morals, because he was still heavily invested in the group/cause despite not being a good person.
>Every time it made for an interesting story, and a good time.
No, not just when I played the Evil character. Every time.

I've had PVP conflict ruin a game before, but that wasn't "his character is bad", that was "these two players now hate eachother in real life and its ruining our campaign."

>>48335657
I'll be honest; I stopped using Alignment years and years ago entirely.
Never made a lick of sense, and everyone who
's tried playing without it was glad to and started running their own games without it.
It really cuts down on the forced Edginess and fractiousness "for alignment reasons", which are about as enriching as having a Dwarf and Elf playing out the "Legolas/Gimli" schtick for 1000th time.

Alignments should have died off decades ago.

>>48335668
Just because something CAN be "made to work" doesn't mean that there's sufficient benefit to justify going to the effort of doing it.

In other words, if you can only enjoy my game as a diametrically opposed alignment, I would question your motives for joining the group in the first place.

>>48335695
Some of my best campaign arcs have come from evil characters, and since the effort is pretty damn minimal, I would say it's 100% justified. If you don't like it, that's fine, you do you senpai.

>>48335424
What group or ideal uses whatever specific multiclass combo you're going for? By using the Pokemon Master dream as your argument you're giving into the faggot who said the DM can just subvert whatever multiclass combo you choose using your own argument against you.
>My goal is to belong to this order that has this class combo
>Well friend that order doesn't exist.
>fug

>>48335711
It sounds like you play in a lot of Evil/Murderhobo parties.
Evil characters can easily work well in very grey parties of characters.
It really doesn't sound like your "Evil" characters act particularly evil in the course of the actual game. Again, I don't care much for Alignments to begin with. Like as not your "Evil" character would get along pretty well in my non-aligned parties.

>>48335691
+1.

Though having a character with dubious morals can still be fun, regardless of whether you use the alignment rules.

Ruthless cutthroat mercenary who is in it to eventually kill the neighboring country's king for shit that happened in the past?

An orc barbarian who doesn't see a problem with torturing defeated enemies for information, or eating dead enemies because "they're dead, they're not using their meat anymore. Were you planning to resurrect them?"

An assassin/spy in the employ of the country, or the church, which the party works for.

All kinds of interesting characters can be not morally good people.

>>48335691
>>48335735
I don't feel good agreeing with people who spam the Enter key, but I do.

>>48335719
Part of the entitlement of multiclassing is homebrewing up your unlikely Background Orginazation/Order to support your Sorceror/Barbarian/Cleric combo that you totally don't want to play just because the new splat makes them do bitchin' damage.

>>48335719
If both the GM and players aren't retarded, then this is never a problem. If either one is, then you get half the people in this thread, and that's not worth trying to save.

>>48335735
I mean, you are going out into the world to loot antiquities, genocide unruly green people, and stir up dragons for big gains.

A really moral person would start up an orphanage or join the town militia.

Adventurers by nature are a rough and tumble lot, IMO.

>>48335733
It sounds to me like you're defining "evil" as "saturday morning cartoon villain", instead of expecting subtle shades of grey. Not all good characters are Paladins, and not all evil characters are Antipaladins.

>>48335742
>No shaman barbarian archetype that allows me to control the elements and communicate with the tribe's god

>>48335742
Well yeah, if the DM is okay with it then go ahead, but I think a lot of 5e DMs are gonna see through that and would at least want you to be upfront with what you're doing. I mean, if one of my players let me know that he was rolling up some minmaxed brick shithouse then I might be a little upset, but if I found out later in the game that a player had created some bullshit loophole to make the DM fuckbus then I'd be furious.

>>48335779
Be
A
Fucking
Druid
Already

>>48335771
I'll take your position one step further, that no one has reliably evil or good motivations/intentions on a reliable basis. You have brutal mobsters who wholeheartedly support the Church or orphanages.

So giving someone an "Alignment" at all is just removing subtlety and character from the game.

>>48335798
Animals are food, not friends.

>>48335819
Nothing in Druid says you have to treat animals as "Special Forest Pals".
At all.
It just allows you to give them marching orders or turn yourself into a mean one.

>>48335735
I played an orc like that. I rode on a warg (leadership). Was a fun character. I kept a drow slave I dragged along behind me, and every time she tried to escape or kill me I held her head under water or otherwise harshly punished her. Eventually she got Stockholm syndrome, and we became friends, and I had her co-run my business.

One of the more moral characters thought I should let her go, and I pointed out that drow has no rights in this country, and my orc horde had an alliance with it, and our customs, including slavery, were protected here. He dragged it to a magister and got shut down.

>"How would you feel about us eating you if you died!?"
>"Like you didn't let my meat go to waste. Besides, you don't need my whole body to resurrect me anyways. Toss one finger in my bag of holding with all my stuff, and each of you toss another finger into your own bag of holding, and eat/leave the rest. Resurrect me when you get back to town.
>Shocked looks by all the other players and the gm for like 5 seconds before the character turns to me and says "fair enough.".

>>48335837
Really, it's the American familiarity with racially biased slavery.
In ye olden tymes it was pretty common for people to become the slaves of conquerors, even if they were physically near-identical.

In a fantasy setting the Drow would probably just accept that the fate of slavery had fallen against her this time, couldn't see it being all that horrifying to someone from a society that literally functions through slavery.

>>48335874
>couldn't see it being all that horrifying to someone from a society that literally functions through slavery.
Unless she expects it to be her home-style slavery.

>>48335837
GM played it the Stockholm syndrome. I was just expecting her to learn to behave, and figured eventually if have to kill her in self defense, but instead she gradually developed a near fanatical loyalty to me, and she became a well cared for henchman that followed us around in exchange for a pretty good quality of life with way less people trying to kill her (and people she could count on to keep her alone) than when she was a free drow in a drow civilization.

>>48335946
To keep her alive*

>>48335958
>drow in trow town
>good day, you get tortured and do some torturing
>bad day, you get turned into a fucking spiderbitch

>drow in normal town
>good day, you eat a bunch of pies, and have to shine a warriors sword
>thats possibly an innuendos
>bad day
>you get tortured and do some torturing

why are drows even drows

>>48335837
Talk about bringing your fetishes into the game.

>>48336164
This the kind of nigger that brought down /pfg/
They're coming for you next, /5eg/
Be vigilant

>>48336164
Fetishes? I honestly don't see any fetish material in there, but our group doesn't get into any lewd stuff.

>>48336077
They hunt down the ones that try to escape with a fairly high success rate

>>48336254
There was no drow sex, if that's what you mean. Slave labor turned loyal henchman and ally, that's it.

File: 1450432400805.jpg (47 KB, 635x479) Image search: [Google]

47 KB, 635x479

I'm want to play a Call of Cthulhu based investigator in an upcoming session this wednesday. Any tips for conducting ye' olde investigations?

>>48336298
No advice, but curious what class you're building your investigator with.

Rogue?

>>48336408
I was thinking warlock. Just prohibit myself from using spells untill level 3, then ask GM to find old musty tomes to unlock outer realm knowledge. Looked like a smooth transition and an interesting experience.

>>48335496
>Its not that I misread, but that you come from a position that its inherently doomed to failure, and only by arduous work can it be made acceptable.

Bit late to the party, but I wholeheartedly disagree. I play a Lawful Evil mercenary whose Bond and Flaw are basically that he's loyal but stupidly so. He's been hired by the party, and while he'll happily take what he can, he's very happy working alongside the good party, and does what needs to be done even if it's not entirely savoury.

To enlist the help of a local lord he basically dispersed a peasant revolution despite the fact the lord was wholly evil. The party needed that lord's help though and he was the only one willing to do what the lord asked and he did it without the other characters knowing so they would not have it on their conscience. He basically took the fall for the party. The key to evil characters is to give them a reason to work with others, otherwise you devolve into murderhoboing. That said - Lawful Evil is pretty easy to work with, Chaotic Evil and even Chaotic Neutral can be pains in the ass.

>>48336456
Hmm. Sounds more future cultist than investigator, no?

>>48335152
No? That's jut an Oath of Ancients paladin who's put a few levels on. If you're gonna play with omniscience, sure, you can come up with an example (not that you did here, but I'm sure you could) but if you examine any given moment of a character's life, there's one class he'll slot into.

Last night the party was aboard a smuggling vessel, which was summoning superopium. The party was just booking passage on it. There had been some problems with the crew suspecting the party of bewitching them (and in total fairness to my NPCs, the party's solution to these suspicions was to attempt and fail to bewitch the crew), so most everybody was knocked out or poisoned except 2 regular crew members, the captain, and the first mate. Certainly not enough to steer a vessel safely through a storm.

Well, a storm hits, which I had given the party a lot of warning about. The first thing that happens is that the players try to destroy some of the barrels rolling around on the ship that could knock them over. The barrels are filled with supercocaine, and when the party warlock eldritch blasts them, they explode in a puff of white powder that lingers in the air on the ship. Lightning strikes the ship, causing a fire, which burns the white powder, resulting in a drug haze. for everyone, which hits the NPCs harder (the party all made their con saves).

So the session was them navigating a superstorm with magic and mettle, all under the useless supervision of a whacked out of his mind captain, whose only current desire is to be taken by the gods of communism he sees around him. All the while, he's prophesying about the proletariat taking back the means of production, alternating screaming with giggles.

The party has to restrain him several times, they probably murdered an entire other ship, and they almost got sucked up to the oceanic equivalent of oz by a waterspout, but they weathered the storm.

I know this isn't how drugs work, but this was super!fantasy!heroin okay? It was a pretty fun session.

How'd your sessions go this weekend?

>>48336490
Are those terms really mutually exclusive?

>>48336530
>>48336490
But I can really see where the rogue idea comes in. Stealing into buildings and gather Intel.
>like an actual CoC investihator.

I hadn't thought about that and I'll think it over some more!

>>48336549
You'll of course want the appropriate knowledge skills.

Bard might work too, if you can get your gm to let you change the music/perform fluff.

How do I get a copy of the Death House adventure 'officially'? I'd like to run it tonight for the group at the store but don't want to do it if it would call me out as a dirty pirate.

>>48336675
Death House is available free on the internet from the official site.

If you're thinking of Curse of Strahd, to get it officially you generally have to pay.

What is this question i don't even.

>>48336675
Who would know

>>48336688
>Death House is available free on the internet from the official site.
Thank you. I couldn't find it on the DM Guild website, so I wasn't sure.

>If you're thinking of Curse of Strahd, to get it officially you generally have to pay.
Nah, I'm buying that but it won't be in stock in time for me to run Death House tonight.

>What is this question i don't even.
Who are for to what now?

File: Vampires_-_Wayne_Reynolds.jpg (107 KB, 400x555) Image search: [Google]

107 KB, 400x555

How do I go about creating a vampire bbeg that isn't just a Strahd ripoff?

>>48336705
http://media.wizards.com/2016/downloads/DND/Curse%20of%20Strahd%20Introductory%20Adventure.pdf

If you're looking for "official" content, it will generally be on wotc's site. DMs guild is more for a homebrew marketplace.

>>48336720
Give him different motives than Strahd.
Give him a different personality than Strahd.
Give him a different court than Strahd.
Give him a different set of powers than Strahd.

Being a vampire is just an affliction. You can take any given villainous NPC you've come up with over the years, add vampirism to them, and boom, you've got a villainous vampire.

>>48335033
paladin/rogue - holy assassin hunting vampires in the mist

Lord Karl the Third is a middle aged man that works for some church. He likes mushrooms, young girls and his holy book. For reasons unknown (young girls) he got kicked out of his church so now he's looking to redeem himself by killing the biggest vampire there is.

Que action music.

>>48335223
>hi i'm 12 and what is this

>>48337041
>young Girls
>absolutelyDisgusting.png
Why not young Boys?

>>48337158
That's completely fine as well. Whatever floats your boat, sir.

>>48337158
Gay pedo church folk is so overdone.

>>48337181
And still they appear in the papers at semi-regular intervals.
Its more of a classic than a trope at this point.

How would you guys make a monk/rogue multiclass?

>>48337426
>How would you guys make a monk/rogue multiclass?
By carefully not.

File: fattyfatfat.jpg (530 KB, 1231x1626) Image search: [Google]

530 KB, 1231x1626

>>48337426
Like this pretty much.

>>48337426
By sage advice, unarmed strikes do not qualify for "finesse weapon", and you therefore shouldn't be able to sneak attack with bare fists. Which is an absolute travesty, of course.

Other than that I suppose both class share an healthy relationship with Dexterity, making the multiclassing pretty straightforward.
If you have a very fun-oriented game with a DM that doesn't really care about balance as much as half the autists here seem to, you could use your Arcane Trickster's mage hand to punch people. That could be fun.

Both classes have very linear progression making it a bit effy to multiclass with, past the first level in Rogue (that you get mainly for Expertise). But it's honestly fine.

The thing is, though, what kind of character would you be thinking here? Because you don't multiclass for the sake of multiclassing.
You multiclass to refine a character and to make their mechanics align with how they'd fight/contribute to their adventuring groups.

The most obvious character design would be the Assassin-ShadowMonk I guess. I don't suck dicks daily so I wouldn't know much about that weeabo shit, but I guess that's an easy character right there.
Monk 1-5 (Way of Shadow, Extra Attack & Stunning Strike)
Rogue 1-3 (Assassin)

Then your character is 8th level and you'll be able to assess what your party need. Planning ahead isn't necessary, in my opinion.

I've been thinking about 1st level survivability.

What if one were to establish the following houserule?
All hit dice decrease 1 step. So d6 becomes d4, d8 becomes d6 and so on.
1st level HP becomes full Constitution score (not CON) + Max. value of your HD.
Following levels stay the same: rolled HD (or average) + CON.

It would bump initial HP up a bit compared to normal rules, even out around 10th level and tank a smidge by level 20.

What would break?

>>48337671
But... why? That seems so unnecessary to me.

>>48335440
This is why in the original post of mine at the top of the thread I said I might as well homebrew instead of doing multi-class.

Since thats the easiest way to get Find Steed "Legit" and is still really inefficient and yes it would be dumb to put 5 levels just for a single spell.

So its kind of funny you've been arguing with random people when I agreed originally.

>>48337671
My autism.

>>48337721
So PCs are harder to one hit kill

>>48337671
>>48337729

Rather than going through a bunch of hoops like that, just milestone level your players up to level 2 after a couple of combats.

>>48337738
FFS, it's just a thought experiment.
I know PCs aren't considered real people until level 3.

>>48337763

I didn't realize you were theorycrafting.

In that case, I think it's a bit much. I prefer the philosophy of "change as little as possible."

Alternatively, you could simply fiat the enemies your players fight to be weaker than they actually are mid-battle.

>>48337763
>it's just a thought experiment.
is that the new
>it's just a prank bro
?

>>48337789
>I didn't realize you were theorycrafting.
Sorry for not making it clearer.

>I prefer the philosophy of "change as little as possible."
To be fair, it changes about bugger all rules-wise.
To only thing really affected is rest healing, it becomes much weaker than before.
Well, that and late game survivability. As I've never played at those levels I have no Idea how much those 10-15 HP characters lack affect things

>Alternatively, you could simply fiat the enemies your players fight to be weaker than they actually are mid-battle.
It's the swinginess that bothers me, not enemies' power. I suppose, I could make lv 1 foes' damage static, yeah.

>>48337820

I believe all Monster Manual entries have a static number next to the creature's damage, which is the average damage of their swing. You can use that as static damage, or you could use X-1 if you want to be more generous.

>>48337849
Huh, so it does. Not that it's hard to calculate but still thanks.

I still wonder how much breaks, though

>>48337863
Using static enemy damage works fine. I tend to use static damage for the first 2 or 3 levels.
Well, kind of. I roll and then average it with the static value so there's a little variation.

>>48338464
Or you could rewrite damage using d2.

So d4 becomes d2+1, d6 becomes d2+2 and so on

>>48335307
Single class Thief is actually amazing already and I think most dips are a waste. You really want all their features in most campaigns, SA dice and ASIs asap since their uptime is very high in pretty much every encounter. Supreme Sneak allows you to sneak around in daylight or zipping between concealment without worry. UMD turns you into a caster with scrolls, staffs and spell gems. Thief's Reflexes feature is the best in the game, can't beat an extra round every encounter if you have Alert.

A four level Hunter Ranger dip after level 12 in rogue might be the best for a Thief if you do a lot of hex crawling in a low magic setting(making UMD a lot shittier) and don't plan on hitting 17 ever. Not getting lost is a huge deal, required for any survival or planar campaign, and being able to scout stealthy quickly and safely is a big boon. Fighting style, favored terrain/enemy, hunters mark, extra skill and Hunter's Prey (Giant Slayer is a lot better at higher levels for rogues) are real neato for rogues.

Damn, now I really want to make a demon tracking planar traveling thief.