>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 [Embed]
>/tg/ Character Sheet
https://mega.nz/#F!x0UkRDQK!l-iAUnE46Aabih71s-10DQ
Feat Edition. What feats do you love, or hate? What feats is 5e missing?
>>46664446
Memes
>>46664446
That post #. Checked.
>>46664446
Looking for feedback on my versatile weapon master custom feat. Would you take it? Is it better, worse, or about on par with GWM, sharpshooter, and polearm master? The name is still WIP.
Versatile Weapon Master
When you wield a weapon you are proficient in with the versatile property and are not wearing a shield, you gain the following benefits:
-You may use your reaction when you are hit by an attack to add your proficiency bonus to your armor class, possibly causing the attack to miss.
-When you take the attack action while holding a versatile weapon in one hand, you may attempt to grapple or shove as a bonus action.
-When you make an attack with a versatile weapon using both hands, the damage die increases by one size.
>>46664483
It depends on your opinion of 'On par'. Polearm Master is, I feel, on a different level than SS or GWM, and certainly on a different level than FM, which makes no appearance in your post.
If your aim was to create a feat that any character intent on using versatile weapon for most of their play would take as bread and butter, then yes it works. It would be foolish, in my opinion, to not take it if that were the case.
This, therefore, puts the feat on par with PM, since most characters that I have seen wield a reach weapon take the feat. IMO, FM needs to be buffed to match the power levels of the others.
>When you take the attack action while holding a versatile weapon in one hand, you may attempt to grapple or shove as a bonus action.
Is perfectly fine, as is
>When you make an attack with a versatile weapon using both hands, the damage die increases by one size.
The first ability is probably balanced in light of eventual enemy multiattacks and smaller parry windows.
>>46664483
>-You may use your reaction when you are hit by an attack to add your proficiency bonus to your armor class, possibly causing the attack to miss.
Shield restriction aside, this ability alone seems at least equal to Defensive Duelist.
Looks like they're on to us, /5eg/. Martin Durham is apparently Wizards' "IP Enforcement Specialist."
Reuploading everything is going to be a huge pain in the ass. I'll see what I can do.
>>46664446
I really like Actor, Elemental Adept, Tavern Brawler, and Inspiring Leader.
Those feats are niche and allow for a player to define a character partly through the use of those feats. They are more 'In character.'
They allow a great con man to mimic voices, a leader to inspire those around him, a brawler to...brawl, and a pyromancer to use fire with abandon. All of the other feats lack a manner of whimsy in their roleplay potential. That's just me.
Oh, and in >>46664737
by "FM" I meant Defensive Duelist. Forgot it wasnt named Fencing Master.
![Justice.League.S01E24.720p.BR.vk007.mkv_snapshot_19.11_[2016.04.10_22.26.15].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/NkOa701.jpg "Justice.League.S01E24.720p.BR.vk007.mkv_snapshot_19.11_[2016.04.10_22.26.15].jpg")
>>46664841
Hilarious shit:
- None of the files appear to have been removed.
- None of my Mega account stuff has been messed with or blocked.
The only thing that Mega did was block the original 5e folder from being shared, so...
>make new folder
>select all the old subfolders
>move them to new folder.
Done.
Please replace the Mega link in the next thread with this:
>Official /5eg/ Mega Trove v3:
https://mega.nz/#F!BUdBDABK!K8WbWPKh6Qi1vZSm4OI2PQ
What classes are the most mechanically involved to play? I've heard some complaints that a lot of the classes just boil down to 'I move, I attack', even if they're relatively strong. I want to have some buttons to press.
>>46664936
Any caster, really.
>>46664936
Wizard, Sorc, Bard, some flavors of Warlock, Circle of the Land Druid, and Cleric.
>>46664936
>>46664949
Even when non-casters do get buttons, they don't do anything worthwhile compared to spells.
>>46664446
I feel like a new handbook with a handful of feats, spells, weapons, some new class stuff and a few new races and race variants is all 5e needs for game content at this point.
>>46664446
Lucky seems pretty broken with the super advantage rule. Even without super advantage it's already an excellent feat.
For those that don't know what super advantage is, basically when you have a disadvantage and you spend a lucky point, you can select any of the three result for the die roll. Hence super advantage.
>>46665149
"I close my eyes and swing for the fences, praying that my attack connects!"
Eyes closed = disadvantage = super-advantage
>>46664446
My favorite feat is probably elemental adept. I love using it with Dragon sorcerers and being a master of my chosen element. Currently have a fire sorcerer who I'm having a blast with.
I would love to see some new feats but I can't think of any feats in particular that I'd really want atm.
So, our GM is thinking about forward-porting the World's Largest Dungeon module into 5e and running that. I'm not really convinced this is a great idea, but in case it does come to pass, what class should I roll with if I'm gonna be in for a long haul?
>Dwarfquistador War Wizard
Stomping around in Half-plate armor, blasting 'heathens' with my 'thunder-stick' seems both fun and effective. Might be tricky convincing my straight-laced GM that a nation of Spanish-stand-in dwarves exist, though.
>Necromariachi Lore Bard
Tough out the early levels, receive Animate Dead as a poached spell known, create skelebanditos, equip with ponchos and sombreros, win via force multiplication and undying horde
>Chinese Warpanda Moon Druid
Instant gratification as you turn into a hard-to-kill bear at 2nd level. Greedily pump spell slots into maintaining Wild shape. Be hard to kill, survive stupid long dungeon via attrition
>>46665200
>Greedily pump spell slots into maintaining Wild shape.
I actually wouldn't recommend this unless you know for a fact that none of the spells you have prepared will help you for the rest of the day. Druid does get some pretty good spells, and using their slots on 1d8 healing per slot used is kind of weak, even as a bonus action.
Perhaps you can refresh my memory 5eg,
Which was the shit module? OotA or PoTA?
Or was it Tyranny of Dragons?
Why the heck are the Digital maps for CoS so big?
Cthulhufag here. Going to start redoing one of my earlier things, a sort-of Lovecraftian (well, more of what a lot of people consider "Lovecraftian", ie. body-horror and gribbly things with tentacles) class themed around mutations and stuff. Coul theoretically make it into a Barbarian path or something, but I had a few specializations in mind that would require it to be a full class to implement. Anyway, I wanted to get some feeback before I start working on it.
The basic idea is that you have a resource ("mutation points" or soemthing) you can use to do stuff. Not really sure on how the amount of the resource would scale as you level.
One specialization would use the points to alter their own body, doing stuff like growing wings, getting a breath weapon or gaining pseudo-DR (if you look at the random muation list on my Elritch Origin Sorcerer, that's pretty much the kind of stuff you'd get), with at higher level ebing able to have more than one mutation at the same time, and even temporarily turning into a big gribbly monsters.
Other spec would center around creating minions and giving them different "upgrades", with higher level abilities letting you create stronger minions, and even summon the weaker ones in middle of combat (normally it would require a ritual to create one, and could not be done in combat).
I was thinking of making a third spec as well. Something that inflicts effects on enemies would be thematically fitting (since the other two are "mutate yourself" and "mutate your minions", "mutate your enemies" would be the logical third one), but not sure how to implement that. Possibly also make it a spellcaster with a very limited selection of thematically fitting spells.
Also, the whole thing would need a good name.
>>46666036
I love the concept.
Call it Mutator as a place holder and get cracking with the gooy bits
Somewhat new DM here, in my session last night our level 3 dwarf war cleric got his shield arm torn off by an owlbear. Does this mean he can't cast any spells with a somatic component as long as he's holding onto his warhammer?
I want losing his arm to be a big deal, but not so punishing it forces him to strictly cast or fight in melee without losing a round or two for dropping and picking up his weapon.
How can I handle this so he still has to play around the disability without it completely gimping him?
>>46665149
>>46665165
That still isn't how that works, as has been explained several times. Disad+Lucky works as follows:
Roll 2d20 (Let's say yo get 3 and 15)
Roll luck die (Get a 7)
Choose one of the two rolls from disadvantage to replace (Either replace the 3 or the 15 with the 7)
Take the lower of the remaining two results (replacing the 3 with the 7 gets you 7 as your final result, as 7 is lower than 15)
>>46666230
Pretty much yeah.
Unless he gets a weapon that doubles as a casting focus.
Perhaps a staff or something that he can wield one handed?
>>46665844
So they can be printed at full scale and used at the table.
>>46665818
Tyranny of Dragons.
The rest are great.
>>46666302
I don't see how you'd read it that way.
Lucky gives an extra d20 when you make an attack roll, ability check, or saving throw. It then lets you choose which d20 is used for the attack, check, or throw.
This isn't a reroll, so it doesn't follow the rules for rerolls set out in the Advantage/Disadvantage section.
>>46666036
>>46666036
witchcraftfag here
I know there's a lovecraftian druid out there that does mutations with wildshape. Basically the druid path gives the druid a build your own abberation, gaining new mutations he can apply at new levels. You could get one lesser mutation, one greater mutation, etc, etc.
I actually thought that was your work originally, but I didn't read it in your mega.
I bring it up, because I think the tiered mutation thing that he used was cleaner than a hypothetical mutation points system.
>>46666323
A staff will have to suffice for him for now, in the next campaign I thought about having him find a consecrated warhammer with an intricate holy symbol built in to the business end to help him out since I know he wants to play a combat oriented cleric.
>>46666350
It was clarified in Sage Advice like a year ago. And you're right in saying that it isn't a reroll. It does nothing to actually cancel out your Disadvantage, and I find it strange that you would assume that the "take the lower roll" effect would magically disappear for no reason.
>>46666302
That still isn't how that works, as has been explained several times, and shown with links to sage advice.
Lucky+disadvantage works as follows
Roll 3d20
Pick the die you like best.
http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/sageadvice_feats
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/600415618114818048
>>46666389
Or just have him healed?
The godblessed weapon is great for a plothook but you should probably look at giving him his arm back.
Unless of course he just has to suffer it out until he can cast greater restoration
>>46666349
Ok good.
I downloaded the whole Mega because someone said it was being taken down and I hesitated on ToD but I have seen more people talking about OotA so I got the two confused.
Anyway #notmyblog but thanks
>>46666400
>you still have disadvantage, since the feat doesn't... get rid of it
>anything shut off by disadvantage is still shut off
Let's just keep on ignoring these parts then, shall we?
>>46666502
>you could spend a luck point, roll a third d20, and then decide which of the three dice to use.
>decide which of the three dice to use
>decide
>three
Yes, you still have disadvantage. It just has virtually no teeth.
>>46666302
This makes the most sense to me.
A disadvantaged situation is unlucky.
Having the lucky feat just makes the best of a bad situation.
It makes no sense to go from disadvantage to super advantage it just doesn't
>>46666530
Yes, you effectively choose which TWO of the three dice you use for disadvantage, since the disadvantage does not go away.
>>46666551
This absolutely makes sense to me
>>46666551
>>46666559
It's what would make sense, but it's objectively wrong.
Lucky is modifying the entire attack/ability/saving roll. Not half of it (one die in an advantage/disadvantage situation). The lucky rule is add one die, choose the die you want to use after they are rolled.
Lucky adds one die to your roll, which already includes 2 (from advantage or disadvantage), bringing the total to 3. You now roll 3, then choose which of the results you want to use.
>>46666605
Which two of the results makes perfect sense and the wording could be interpreted to mean exactly that
It would also be the most reasonable explanation, which would make the feat perfectly balanced
>>46666699
The wording can't be interpreted your way by any reasonable person. In his twitter, he agrees with the super-advantage characterization, saying lucky people sure are lucky.
In the sage advice collumn, he specifically talks about lucky overriding disadvantage as a rule, except for the areas where disadvantage doesn't deal with dice rolling.
You have to be deliberately retarded to think otherwise at this point.
>>46666605
You're only applying half of the disadvantage rule (roll 2d20) while ignoring the other half (take the lower roll). The devs have flat out said that disadvantage does not go away, and have said nothing to imply that it magically stops working half-way through. Why do you follow the rule when it suits you, then ignore it once it stops working in your favor? At what point does "choose which roll to use with disadvantage still present" become "pick the single highest die and ignore disadvantage rules?"
![return_of_stinkmeaner430[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/YZFAgd4.jpg "return_of_stinkmeaner430[1].jpg")
>>46666744
They' have actually said it magically stops working halfway through. Because lucky is a specific rule, and disadvantage is a general rule, lucky overrules disadvantage to the extent that they conflict.
Lucky's rule is (roll +1 die, choose result from all die rolled)
Disadvvantage's rule is (roll 2d20, choose lowest).
Lucky adds a third die to the first half of the rule, and then directly conflicts with disadvantage: one says to choose the lowest, the other says to choose what you want. Lucky wins as the specific rule. This is all in the linked article if you'd just read nigga.
Using Lucky on a Disadvantage, I'd say use the middle result. It seems like the most logical option
>>46666744
At the point where the devs are saying that the OTHER factors of disadvantage are still present, not the ones related to the die roll. There are certain skills that cannot be used while disadvantaged - you still can't use them.
It also helps to think of the order in which the rules are applied.
Base rule - you roll 1d20 and use that number, and can use skills x,y, and z.
You are disadvantaged - you can't use x and y skills and when you roll, roll 2d20 and choose the lowest to use.
You use Lucky - add one D20 to your current roll, and then choose which of the rolls on the table to use. You are still unable to use skills x and y.
It's order of operations, mate.
I'm wanting to play a MKX Tremor style character and I'm thinking about how best to do so.
Monk do the kicky punchy shit but there is nothing spell wise that they can do that goes with the theme I'm after.
Any suggestions?
Also why does 5e hate the earth element in general.
>>46666833
Thematically what I think they're getting at is the "one in a million shots" sort of vibe from Guards, Guards.
Lucky as it works now (super advantage from disadvantage) can make for those fun gameplay momements where against all the story odds, your character succeeds
>>46666036
Master Transmogrifist? After the old 3.X prestige class that did something similar?
>>46666736
It absolutely can and, in fact, it is, by me and anyone else who has two brain cells to rub together
The wording is open, no reason to get buttmad that someone found a way to make the feat balanced without breaking RAW, even if "twitter said"
You run it how you want, but I'm interpreting it as "choose which two" until an errata or an official sage advice happens
>>46666858
This might be what you're looking for. I've barely looked at it though, but actual Wo4E is garbage.
>>46666886
It makes sense on a thematic level sometimes. As DM I'd probably judge based on dramatic convention.
If I was running the 1/d version of Lucky, I'd probably let the player treat it as super advantage (or required them to burn their entire daily luck points)
IMO, Inspiration is more it than Lucky, Lucky is more small every day things not going wrong.
>>46666796
>>46666840
At no point does the Lucky feat specifically override the "take the lower roll" feature of disadvantage. It does however, override the feature where only 2d20 are rolled. So the interpretation is ultimately left up to one that is broken (super-ad) and one that is perfectly balanced. I can't say that I agree with your interpretation, but I ultimately can't stop you, nor can I force you to use an option that I find ituitive and logical.
>>46666911
This guy. It was in an official sage advice you tard. Go download the sage advice compendium and search for lucky.
>>46666376
I probably have the pdf it's in. Some other anon converted Lords of Madness from 3.5 to 5th edition and did some general Lovecraftian homebrew. It was probably him.
![00e49c65f1[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/LHTmqhY.png "00e49c65f1[1].png")
>>46666911
lmaooooooooo
source: official sage advice compendium
Both lucky and disadvantage modify which die you take. Disadvantage says to take the lower of 2, lucky says you get to choose which you want. If the lower of two isn't the one you want, you've got a conflict.
They conflict. That's basic english right there anon. In the event of two conflicting rules, the more specific (lucky) overwrites the more general (diisadvantage)
>>46666964
if you do, could you share it here? I wasn't able to save it when the anon last put it up in this thread.
>>46664446
I would like more feats like Magic Initiate and Martial Adept that are like weaker versions of class or archetype features, just as a milder form of multiclassing.
>>46667011
>Lyricist, req. Cha 14
>You gain 1 Inspiration die, recoverable on a short rest, and the ability to use Song of Rest, recoverable on a long rest.
Or something like that
>>46666934
Thanks had a quick look at that looks alright.
My GM is pretty lax so I reckon he'd let me use it.
The naming in this though, it's physically painful to read.
>>46667077
What, you mean you don't want to become the teapot? What kinda faggot are you?
>>46666858
Tremor themed spells go:
Cantrips: mold earth, magic stone, blade ward, resistance, thaumaturgy, thunderclap
Lv1: Earth Tremor, Absorb Elements, Expeditous Retreat, Longstrider, Catapult, Grease(mud), Jump, Shield, Thunderwave
Lv2: Earth Bind, Maxie's Earthen Grasp, Arcane Lock, Barkskin(mudskin/sandskin), Blindness/Deafness, Dust Devil, Enhance Ability, Enlarge, Hold Person, Knock, Magic Mouth, Pass Without Trace, Protection from Poison, Shatter, Spider Climb
Lv3: Erupting Earth, Meld into Stone, Elemental Weapon, Melf's Minute Meteors, Protection from Energy, Slow, Wall of Sand
Lv4: Stone Shape, Stone Skin, Conjure Minor Elementals, Elemental Bane, Fabricate, Freedom of Movement
Lv5: Wall of Stone, Animate Objects, Conjure Elemental, Hold Monster, Passwall, Telekinesis, Transmute Rock
Lv6: Bones of the Earth, Move Earth, Flesh to Stone, Investitude of Stone
Lv7: Reverse Gravity
Lv8: Earthquake, Maze, Power Word Stun
Lv9: Inprisonment, Meteor Swarm, Time Stop
So, two things I'm thinking of House Ruling
- Ritual Caster, move it back to how it was in 4e, if you have a ritual tome and the components, you can do it as a Ritual even without the feat. Level 1-3 rituals are trivially easy to find if you have the gold, and most villages usually have a witch or priest who can handle them up to level 2 (I consider most full grown adults roughly equivalent to levels 3-4, albeit without some things I make PC only).
- Also one player who decided to get Find Familiar on a tomelock is asking me for the ability to use the spell on other people; it's not just that she wants to be able to give familiars to the other party members, she wants to play her warlock as some sort of pet-giving Santa. I feel like it's harmless enough andfunenough to let her do it.
>>46664446
>What feats do you love?
KEEN MIND
E
E
N
M
I
N
D
>>46666948
>>46666966
Okay, my bad I thought it was just twitter
Still though, it can be interpreted as:
Disadvantage (2d20 + Luckyd20)
And I choose to do so
Hey /5eg/
I've got an idea for a character, a kind of "Mad Scientist" kind with a liking of experimentation.
Mad is the proper sense not in the "lolrandumb" sense of the word
I dont know which class works best and feats and such to take
>>46667104
Stop my eyes are bleeding.
>>46667180
A lot of wizard and druid spells are what I'm after which was my concern.
Druid might work if done with monk fist scaling shit.
>>46667223
Keen Mind's list of small bonuses looks really amazing, but I feel like it only ever comes up on a Fighter (due to a million feat slots) or Variant Human (to the point where it's one of these feats that I'd almost consider to be a human racial trait)
>>46667242
I almost always end up with a 17 in Int at level 1, so I get Keen Mind at level 4 to round it out to 18 and get those great bonuses.
>>46667184
Nah m8, familiars are way too good
Also rituals work fine
>>46667233
Transmutation Wizard
Tome Warlock
Rogue or Bard with expertise in Medicine, Nature, and Alchemist tools
>>46667242
Wizard. Minor Conjuration the keys you saw at the guard's waist for half a second. Recreate the lost ancient writings in your own time. Borrow someone else's spellbook for ten minutes and recreate it to scribe in your own time. Leave your spellbook secure at home and illusion/conjure a copy to ready spells from, returning only to scribe new ones.
>>46667242
Keen mind wizards only need to look at their spellbook once a month
Keen mind conjurers can do some ridiculous shit
>>46667011
There's already an extended feats list that someone brewed, pretty much exactly what you're looking for.
>>46667274
>>46667261
>Wizard
Shit, obviously it would be amazing on a class I never play.
Also now I know why my last player wizard picked Keen Mind when something almost happened to his spellbook.
The mega trove link is broken right? or is it just me :o
>>46667316
It has been attacked by WotC ninjas
>>46666230
How did this happen? I don't recall any rules for tearing limbs off.
>dm is running out of the abyss next
>tells us to make a character with starting gear
I was under the impression you start with fuck all. Am I wrong?
>>46667184
I would let her teach the spell to other players,over a long period of time.
Something like this: it takes 30 days to teach a ritual to a standard level 1 fighter. Every day they can make an arcana check, dc 15. If they succeed, they knock 3 days off the clock instead of one that day..
Tweak the numbers to your liking.
Alternatively, just go with what she wants. It's gonna gum up your turn order though, when ever player has a familiar they want to move as well. That's the big harm.
>>46667330
thankfully, anon was able to save it from extinction up here >>46664898
>>46667184
The familiar thing is silly.
Familiars can grant advantage on melee attacks, can be used to scout telepathically, among many other great uses.
Having multiple familiars in the party effectively means all the party's attacks will be given with advantage.
>>46667338
You can find it again if you look hard enough.
>>46667338
Stop metagaming you dink
>>46667335
What do you want rules for?
Crit or massive damage can easily result in permanent damage or limb removal.
But it is in the DMG somewhere iirc.
>>46667351
I actually hadn't full read the spell, so I kind of assume 5e had nerfed familiars.
>>46667343
Yeah, alternately I'll ask if she'd be okay with a cantrip that does Find Familiar with only a fraction of the bonuses.
Hey guys I found the Official Sage Advice that says you roll 3d20 and choose one.
>>46664446
>http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/sageadvice_feats
>>46667449
And thus the new pissant meme was born.
>>46667391
Just give her tool prof with the craftsman's kit and have her be able to make a clockwork familiar-like animal on a daily DC25 craft roll
Simple
>>46667391
Or none of the bonuses.
Give them limited telepathy and nothing else.
Free spirit pets is a reasonable power to give for free.
>>46667482
Are we sure the people pretending not to understand basic english syntax and "interpreting" it any other way weren't meming. themselves?
>>46667449
>Full plate in death house
>Halberds and glaives
>Rats
>Martials
>Bladelock and Beastmaster
And now this
Fuck this gay ass general
>>46666981
I'll do it once I get home. On my phone at the moment.
>>46667521
>rats
I haven't been here in a while. What is rats?
>>46667515
Eat shit kiddo, it's still open wording
>>46667496
>>46667505
>gnome warlock gives everyone clockwork pets possessed with tiny free spirits
>>46667544
Stop it, the general needs less memes, not more m8.
>>46667539
Long death monk and fiendlock gain temp hp by killing anything, even if they just keep a bag with baby rats and kill one before combat
>>46667574
Fiendlock can also hex a rat and keep the spell going forever, though that isn't strictly necessary.
I like the idea of a guy who sold his soul to some fiend having a compulsion to carry around a cage of rats that he routinely kills specimen from, eating them and shit.
What's the four suits of plate meme?
>>46667561
I tucking swear to god I'm not memeing, this is how I run it or otherwise it's op
Other things I could do:
Make it 1/Day
Turn it into just granting advantage/negating disadvantage/giving disadvantage
Using it at disadvantage takes 3 luck points
Or whatever
>>46667622
There are four suits of full plate in the death house adventure that (according to the meme) fit any humanoid, are not decorative and will not rust if taken out
>>46667642
If they're not leaving Castle Ravenloft in a casket, they deserve the fucking suits
>>46667624
That's reasonable
Because the way some people want to run it is: Roll 3d20, pick whichever you want
And that is imbecillic
>>46667623
>I tucking swear to god I'm not memeing, this is how I run it or otherwise it's op
It really isn't all that OP, either. To be completely honest it really isn't that different from being able to cast True Strike (a *cantrip*) 3/day. No one argues that True Strike is overpowered.
Further rolling 3d20 and coming up with a, say, 15, has no in-game effect that is different from rolling 1d20 and coming up with a 15.
If Lucky actually granted Advantage or negated Disadvantage, then it would be overpowered, since both of those states have significant in-game effects (particularly for Rogues). Otherwise all it really does is let that 3 you rolled be a 15 instead, which isn't any different than if that 3 had come up as a 15 in the first place.
>>46667624
Nah, see it works like this
>after you roll the die, but before the outcome is determined
So you roll the 2d20, then roll an additional dice, pick from your pool of 3d20, and then announce the result to your DM for confirmation.
There's no point trying to claim yours is an "intelligent" interpretation of the RAW as the people who wrote it have already clarified that the intended interaction is as I described above.
What you mean to say, instead of shitposting by stating that yours is the intelligent way of reading the ruling, is simply "I don't like this rule, it's too good, here's how to make it worse."
Which is fine, it's your game, do what you want. Just don't shittalk people who were discussing the RAW ruling and the clarification given.
If I wanted to create a ring of protection myself as a paladin how would I go about doing it? Just cast shield of faith on a ring alot or what?
>>46667703
Shit, you're right. Sorry, it's early in the morning for me. I actually do run Lucky as outlined in the Sage Advice and always interpreted it that way, and was trying to put it up that way, but...meh. Again, early in the morning, mea culpa.
I'm also this guy, >>46667701. I think that post was better. I'm keeping that one and deleting the first one now.
>>46667725
Ask your DM.
>>46667725
Personal opinion on crafting magic items
- The ring must be made to specific specifications that require a high DC jewelry check, and knowledge of a related ritual
- The materials would have to be gathered in also specific ways, and would very likely include things that are rare and have to be gotten hold of personally. Obsidian touched by the flame of a red dragon, for example.
- Enchanting would cost an Inspiration
Basically enchanting a permanent item should be an adventure on its own. It should not be "put XP and Gold in this slot for item".
>>46667725
The rules for creating magic items insist you're a spellcaster who can cast an applicable spell and invest anunreasonablegold and time cost into the item.
That's all optional rules, so your DM will have final say obviously, and for something as straightforward as a ring of protection just ask around in a magical item shop (assuming such a thing exists in your setting), or ask a wizard NPC to give it to you in leue of a planned GP reward for a quest or something.
Basically ask your DM, there's no codified way of doing it.
>>46667725
Making items is dependent on the DM. Generally it requires blueprints for making the item, materials for making the item and a casting of a spell into the item (Probably a spell more powerful than shield of faith)
>>46667781
>The rules for creating magic items insist you're a spellcaster who can cast an applicable spell
That's actually the main reason I personally disregard them. I want crafting to be hard, rare, but open to anyone who is willing to do it and has the craftsmanship required for it.
A master smith who puts his soul into his craft and gets hold of perfect materials to make the perfect sword is more narratively interesting than a wizard who casts magic weapon on a pile of abstracted gold.
I actually tend to have certain magic items have specific attunement bonuses that only apply to the person it was made for.
>>46667771
I agree with this with the following exeptionHigh Level spellcasters.
Because at that point their understanding or attunement with their field would arguably facilitate such an ability.
It's also kind of dumb that when you're talking about a famous historical mage they're decked out with magic items they enchanted themselves but your level 20 wizard is wandering around using things he scavenged from tombs and such.
>>46667832
I would probably allow a Transmuter or Artificer to either guess the ritual or drop the DC to a point where they can do the right crafting method without needing expertise or a 20 Dex or whatever is the attribute for crafting tools.
>>46667725
>>46667725
Be at least level 6, have proficiency with Jeweler's tools, spend 5000 over 200 days, spending a lv1 spell slot every day
>>46667886
>Be at least level 6, have proficiency with Jeweler's tools, spend 5000 over 200 days, spending a lv1 spell slot every day
Christ that takes awhile...
>>46667832
not if you use the downtime rules. Between adventures, years might pass.
>>46667864
Oh sure, there definitely should be the scope for failure, a high level wizard shouldn't just poop out magic items.
But something like a +1 dagger should not require an absurd amount of item gathering, complex and detailed roleplay of the construction, or even a vast amount of downtime expended.
Maybe just a really hard DC and if they fuck it up, they lose a few hitdie for a random duration, 1d20 days or something.
Then you have a tradeoff of risk and reward, but without being an unreasonable and frankly non-narrative based financial cost.
>>46667903
How many campaigns have you played in which routinely years pass between sessions?
>>46667906
>But something like a +1 dagger should not require an absurd amount of item gathering, complex and detailed roleplay of the construction, or even a vast amount of downtime expended.
Depends on the setting.
>>46667827
Personally I would eliminate the requirement of they are proficient with the appropriate tools, see >>46667886
A ring of protection could be crafted by any jeweller with the time and money expenditure (or appropriate materials, which would reduce time)
Same for a sword or whatever by a blacksmith
>>46667781
>>46667827
Why can't it be a group effort? Someone not a spell caster making the weapon while someone who can use magic just does the magic-y bits? Does the craft require infusion with magic during the entire process or something?
>>46667923
A level 20 wizard in a low magic setting? Nah, sorry homie, that doesn't really add-up.
I like to split the magic and bonuses.
Anyone with fine craftsmanship and fine materials can craft a blade of +1, +2, +3. That blade won't have other magical properties (such as being treated as a magic weapon), unless it is properly consecrated or ritualized by a proficient cleric or magicky type. It's just a really good weapon.
Similarly, anyone can get a cleric or magicky type to consecrate/ritualize their weapon for the right amount of gold (or learn to do so themselves), but it won't gain any bonuses to hit or damage from the ritual.
The ritual can be learned of course, as can craftsmanship.
If you want to do more esoteric effects (such as converting a staff into a staff of the woods), you need to research or find a new ritual.
I also like the idea of making mundane effects more widely available. Like a fighter may commission a sword and craft oils and poisons to use on it.
>>46667906
For a +1 Dagger, I'd say High DC weaponsmithing check for silvering and the craftsmanship, somewhat less than the full year it took Domingo Montoya to make a masterwork rapier, and probably something rare or weird.
IMC, most +1 weapons are basically caused by the emotional residue of major events related to fighting, like the weapons of the fallen at major battles and shit. Sometimes family heirlooms gain it just from poetry and songs about them or their wielders. Something like the sword used by the Bonnie Earl of Moray in his last duel would likely gain the bonus from that.
>>46667933
It's also a personal preference thing, I think.
I'm perfectly fine with certain items like wands, rings that cast spells on command and stuff being the province of spellcasters. For some things I much prefer having a more narrative, mythical power involved, with items imbued in ways that go beyond just knowing a few spells.
Is it possible to bestow some sort of unwanted effect (for example - you touched that hing and it took your shadow, now your character has no shadow or some weird thing like that) without it being a curse that can easily be removed by a spell? I think it can lead to some weird, interesting things but I do not want to make it feel unfair to players.
>>46667933
It can be, I just assume if you're not a caster you can probably find someone who is, and factor spellcasting services costs into the craft
If the player can make a case for why the item would not need magic, IE, a guy wants to make a flametongue weapon out of a weapon he has and is proficient with alchemist and tinker's tools then he could just say he made a shishkebab
Putting Magic Weapon and Elemental Weapon on the Eldritch Knight spell list, yay or nay?
>>46667998
So long as you can explain why it can't be fixed by Remove Curse beyond "THE PLOT DEMANDS IT," it's fine.
I've got a warlock character whose been coerced into being a gofor for his Patron in order to get back memories of his childhood.The DM is a shitter who ends every encounter with his author insert persona saving everyone, so I doubt the warlock will be around long enough to succeed.
>>46667946
Maybe magic doesn't stick on objects easily. We're talking permanent magic here, most spells that let you do that RAW need to be cast every day for a year.
>>46667998
Use Ravenloft's 2E curse system (not sure they put it in 5e); they were generally deemed too powerful to be broke up by Remove Curse, but they also usually had a mundane out.
>>46668062
Will dispel magic remove a curse?
>>46668062
I just wish to use odd effects for fiddling with powerful arcane items that might be beyond the understanding of the PCs. It is a sandbox game so It is not for plot reasons, but more to keep the "threading through the unknown" vibe.
>>46668090
Interesting, I will give that a look. Thank you.
>>46668091
Depends on the curse. Most state that they can't be removed by any means except (list here).
If Dispel Magic ain't on the list, it ain't getting the job done.
>>46668111
I'm 100% sure it's in Domains of Dread, the black setting manual; I am not 100% sure it was in the boxed sets before, if you hunt for pdfs.
>>46668091
Nope, remove curse will though
>>46668037
They can already get magic weapon at level 8 if they don't have a magic weapon by then. I think most are going to cast haste over elemental weapon
I know that a similar invocation was in the beta. Would this be too overpowered?
>Pact of the Blade, Level 9
>whenever you strike an enemy, you may cast the spell hex as if with a 1st level spell slot, but without using a spell slot. Hex spells cast this way don't require concentration. Whenever you cast a hex spell this way, all other hex spells you have cast this way end.
It seems to me something like this would make pact of the blade good again.
>>46668247
It's also something EK and Valor Bard get in some way as class abilities. It would make sense to make Bladelock work as a full gish.
>>46668247
Yes, I had a similar idea some time ago
>>46664446
So the mega link is down.
>>46668318
That sentence didn't need the "So", friend.
>>46668318
Wizards is taking it down. Someone posted a new one in this thread or the last
Would Range, Reach and Close Melee be a reasonable trifecta to steer a small party towards as primary combat roles?
Are there any feats that grant fighting styles? Or any other way to gain a fighting style other than MCing?
Also, what do you think of this one:
Fighting style: Brawling
You gain proficiency with unarmed strikes.
While not holding a weapon or a shield or using the matial arts Monk class feature you gain a +1 bonus to AC and a damage bonus to unarmed strikes equal to your proficiency.
>>46668384
I have no idea why you would want to do such a thing.
>>46668411
To ensure they have bases covered? IDK.
>>46668428
Nah, that's zany as fuck.
If you really want to force a party to fil roles have someone to be in melee, someone for single target damage, someone for aoe stuff.
But honestly that's pretty stupid to do, I have no idea why you would want to force roles, surely your players aren't dumb enough to field a party with significant drawbacks and then never come up with ways to negate their shortcomings?
>>46668329
Okay.
>>46668473
It's not so much forcing them to fill roles, but like, I could see doing with a polearm, but literally only one player has anything ranged and it's by virtue of being a warlock.
>>46668384
Tanks at the front line with greatswords
Halberds/Glaives/Pikes in the second row making reach attacks
Rogues and Rangers at the back making sneak attacks and spell attacks respectively
>>46667998
Make it not a curse, something actually took your shadow and spirited it away. This has X side effects, as your shadow took some things with it.
Instead of a curse as inspiration, there is a spell which imprison things and only wish or certain triggers can get them out.
>>46668528
That's not really a problem is it?
Have them find some ranged weapons, 5th edition doesn't lock you into using a single weapon like previous editions have.
For strength characters: Throwing axes, javelins, daggers (finesse lets you use strength OR dex, you choose).
For dex: Bows, darts, daggers, etc.
>>46668384
There are casters, and there are meatshields who hit things with sticks a lot.
>>46664446
>What feats is 5e missing?
Bows and two-handed weapon users both have a massive DPR boosting feat. I think Dex-based melee could use one, though I'd be fine with it not being as huge a DPR boost as Sharpshooter and Great Weapon Master. Something for Monks, melee Rogues, Dex Fighters, and Bladelocks to benefit from would be good.
>>46668390
>unarmed damage higher than a monks
>unarmed damage higher than weapons
>>46668600
In the playtest, Defensive Duelist used to be both the Parry-on-Reaction it's now and the Finesse equivalent of GWM
>>46668633
>damage higher than monks
Lmao
Unarmed strikes only do 1 damage + modifier, so this feat would let you punch for an incredible 7 damage with 20 strength.
HOLY SHIT THAT'S AMAZING.
>>46668671
>and a damage bonus to unarmed strikes equal to your proficiency
That's 1+mod+prof
6-12 damage depending on level
Official class tier list
Fun, Useful tier
Warlocks
Sorcerers
Druids
People dislike you, but still generally fun and useful tier
Wizards
Clerics
Okay, these are barely acceptable, but why would you bother tier?:
Eldritch Knights
Arcane Tricksters
Paladins
Rangers
Booted from the campaign for being boring as fuck for everyone tier:
Fighters
Barbarians
Monks
Clerics of War
>>46668671
You'd start at 3 non-stat damage, so slightly below a d6, and end at 7, slightly above a greatsword.
Of course unless your DM allows you to enchant your fists somehow you're going to suffer, but if you can get magic fists it's a fairly reasonable set of always-present TWF weapons.
>>46668671
>Unarmed strikes only do 1 damage + modifier,
Yeah.
>so this feat would let you punch for an incredible 7 damage with 20 strength.
At level 1, yeah. Which is pretty good since there's no damage roll. It would get better for Fighters the further they level because of Action Surge and Extra Attack.
>>46668759
Sorry, you're right.
13 damage at level 20.
>>46668763
>druid
>not awful
>fighters
>boring
I want 2.5 to go away
>>46668812
>Druid
>awful
I want retards to go away.
>>46668822
>bad wizard
>good
ayy here we go again.
>>46668834
>bad wizard
lamo'ing at your life.
>>46668763
>Bard isn't on the tier list
>Paladin isn't fun, useful tier
>Sorcerer isn't in barely acceptable
>Moon Druid and Beastmaster aren't in a special tier called trap option
The fuck are you doing
>>46668840
>Moon Druid
>trap option
I hope you meant to write Land Druid.
>>46668837
>dogshit spells
>wildshape becomes completely useless after perhaps level 10
ayy lamayo you fucking joke
>>46668851
I hope you meant "druid"
>>46668763
>people dislike you
>wizard
For what purpose?
>>46668851
Wildshape's only value past level 6 is minor utility. Expecting a Moon Druid to pull its weight in combat wildshaped after that point is falling for a 3e meme.
>>46668853
>dogshit spells
Ayy. Good one.
>wildshape becomes completely useless after perhaps level 10
You mean at the level Moon Druids gain Elemental Forms? Try again.
>>46668866
Nice meme.
>>46668868
Jealously
>>46668868
>"Okay nerd, you mean to tell us that throughout this whole thing, we're supposed to value this enormous book higher than our lives? Fuck off, we're hiring a Sorcerer.
>>46668879
You've clearly never played with or as a Moon Druid.
>>46668633
>>46668671
>>46668759
>>46668767
Remember
>can be used with tavern brawler but not martial arts
>can only be used when both hands are free
>hands are not weapons so no TWF, not even with feat, no bonus action attacks
>>46668763
>Be wizard
>have bird familiar
Druid is now completely fucking superfluous from level 1.
>>46668905
That stuff is why I prefer to go for Mearls' version of rules clarifications. He may not be a math guy, but his RAI feels more fun oriented.
I would definitely rule that Tavern Brawler and TWF applies to martial arts
y'all is a bunch ofKEKS
>>46668897
>you've never stabbed your testicles with a screwdriver, you don't know how good it feels!
Hey if you want to play as a shit class that was a meme in another edition, go nuts.
I'm sure as fuck not going to play a druid over a Wizard or a Warlock or a Sorcerer or a Cleric or a Bard, or Even an Eldritch Knight or Arcane trickster.
But whatever floats your boat, senpai.
>>46668945
I actually like the druid spell list honestly; it lacks some stuff cleric has, but its spells are fun and flavorful for a Fey-oriented cleric.
>>46668931
I thought of the brawler fighting style so that brawlers can be made without stepping on many toes
Now add a feat that lets you take a fighting style and anyone can be a brawler
>>46668945
Funny that you say all this and yet don't give any objective proof of your claims.
The only class in 5e that sucks is the Beastmaster. 5e did a good job at making pretty much everything else good enough at their intended role to be worth playing.
>>46668962I disagree but respect your opinion, but I'm commited to the whole "Hostile Jackass" thing now.
FUCK DRUIDS, THEY ARE JUST SHIT WIZARDS GO BACK TO 3.5 FUCK
>>46668976
>The only class in 5e that sucks is the Beastmaster
Five Elements Monk
>>46668989
I forget that class even existed.
>>46666981
>>46667524
Ok, I'm home now so I'll post all three of the guy's pdfs I have.
>>46668976
5E is the first edition since 2 that is making me want to try playing something besides Bard.
>>46669001
It's because it literally doesn't.It's four elements
>>46669003
Oops, turns out one of the pdfs (with Lovecraftian monsters, seemingly converted from CoC) is too big. Can't post that one.
>>46668989
>Five Elements Monk
>tfw you now want to add Spirit and use it to fill in the lack of awesome Wot4E has
Or maybe rework it on the chinese elements.
>>46663860
Nobody's been saying that martials are mechanically bad or that they have a dearth of things to do. It's been said at least 10 times by people on both sides that the martials can do all sorts of interesting things. It'll probably have to be said 10 more times because someone's going to keep arguing a point we already agree on as if we don't.
The issue is that every interesting thing that they can do, so can the caster. But the caster can also do interesting things with magic, and the martials just can't. There is nothing that is uniquely martial-only in the "interesting" department, but plenty of things that are caster-only. The only things that casters are denied are a few primarily combat-oriented abilities that are unique to martial classes, but even then, the casters can generally get very close to replicating them through their spells and other abilities. Fighters getting a fourth attack at the max level almost no party is ever going to be is not an incredible advantage or supremely interesting feature when compared to all the stuff the casters will have been doing with even low-level spells for the entire campaign.
I don't know how I can make it more clear. In the World of Awesome, martials are citizens of Physicaltopia and banned from ever setting foot in Magicallandia, while the casters can have dual-citizenship if they want. All the awesome shit that goes on in Physicaltopia when players and DMs remember that it exists is great, sure, but casters with the right build can hop the border and do the same awesome shit. The casters will always have the capacity for MORE awesome, and nothing is denied to them if they really want it. Martials can only distinguish themselves from casters in the dice-rolling department in the middle of combat due to various class features, but when it comes to RP and inventive uses of ability checks or the environment, the casters will always be able to do what the martials can and then some.
>>46669068
No, a caster can't. Spells that imitate mundane effects have a shit ton of caveats to the point where a social-focused caster is better off never taking enchantment spells and just getting the skills and the good Charisma they should have from the get go.
Also there are two feats and subclasses specifically to allow martials to cast spells, just as casters in 5e will, aside from a few specs made for gishing, need to blow feats on doing awesome physical shit in combat.
More importantly, can you learn to let go, this is the third thread you've been dragging this bullshit into.
>>46668931
Is there anyone in the world that doesn't think Tavern Brawler works with Martial Arts? The extra attack of MA and grapple option of TB both key off a bonus action, and your fists don't go up another d3/d4 by taking TB, but every other feature should work just fine together.
>>46669068
have you triednot playing DnD
Dumb question, but does an stone age setting exist or do I have to homebrew one?
>>46668989
Someone posted a fixed wot4e monk earlier in the thread
Also, beastmaster and bladelock are fine, people just have shit DMs that don't give the beast death saves and people don't realize gishes require investment
>>46669068
Give everyone 1/4 spellcasting that doesn't interact with the multiclass rules then. Now everyone's a dual citizen.
>>46669136
>>>46669068
New player here, how disastrous is it to not have perception proficiency for a wizard?
>>46669068
Oh not again with this shit please
Just play 4e if you want 4e
>>46669125
Beastmaster's not fine specifically because it takes an action to command your beast to attack.
>>46669136
That was actually the intent of my plan to let anyone do rituals on a 1/3 progression.
>>46669095
We were previously discussing how a theoretical Wizard with physical ability scores identical to a Barbarian (or whatever martial) should be equally capable of all physical feats, both mechanically in combat, and the non-standard, creative uses of checks and the environment. If the 20 Strength Barbarian can lift an entire table and swing it like a sword, so can the 20 Strength Wizard, just as effectively. Which feat lets the Barbarian cast Meteor Swarm?
>>46669095
You're still missing the point. Every martial class except blade pact warlock (which is objectively the best designed martial class, and that's saying something considering how fucking terribly designed it is) is capped at max 5th level spell slots.
There are 4 whole tiers of play denied the martial (6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th, level spell slots).
While the most a caster misses out on is probably a 4th attack, and that's rendered moot if they just use any number of shapechanging spells to gain a form that has extra attacks.
>>46669125
>Someone posted a fixed wot4e monk earlier in the thread
Homebrew doesn't fix anything. There are numerous groups that aren't going to use homebrewed content, so until WotC fixes it in an official capacity, it's not fixed.
>>46669107
Oh yeah, TB will work for monks in that they'll get +1 STR or CON, but the d4 damage die is useless and the bonus action to grapple competes with the other things a monk can do with their bonus action.
Like flurry a person, or just hit again.
A lot of people just think the damage boost on TB should stack with Martial Arts, so that it bumps the martial die up another step for unarmed strikes (eg 4th level monk with TB does a d6 on unarmed)
>>46669142
it's fine, honestly. Someone will have it.
>>46669166
You picked a bad class for that one, the Barb is always going to be better at table-swinging than the Wizard because Rage exists.
>>46669156
>Just play 4e if you want 4e
While I heartily encourage people play 4e, have we already forgotten that 5e promised it would provide modular rulesets that could be attached to the base game which would emulate the feel of each edition? We should be giving them eternal shit for making no effort to accomplish that.
>>46669197
Fighters get action surge.... I guess they thought that was enough.
>>46669168
>Blade pact is a better martial than Battlemaster
You are literally an idiot.
>>46669095
>More importantly, can you learn to let go, this is the third thread you've been dragging this bullshit into.
protip: if you don't want a conversation to continue, ignore it
don't carry on the argument and them complain the argument is carrying on
>>46669142
About as bad as not having it with any other character
Make a wizard and dump wisdom for pic related I'd say
>>46669197
>have we already forgotten that 5e promised it would provide modular rulesets that could be attached to the base game which would emulate the feel of each edition
I've only heard that through hearsay, so unless you've got a source for that there's no reason to be up-at-arms about it.
>>46669218
Do you mean Second Wind?
>>46669136
I think that's going too far, actually. Martials should stay in their country, and casters should live mostly in theirs. They're relatively well-balanced combat-wise. While a 20 Strength Wizard is probably never going to happen, it CAN if they are so determined.
What I'd like to do is set up a protected area in Physicaltopia that only natural-born citizens can go. It's like an Indian reserve or "martial preservation area" where only those with THE PUREST BLOOD can do crazy things, and the casters have to sit on the outside looking in and saying, "Well, at least I could do something LIKE that, but only if I actually cast a spell first."
>>46669243
No, I meant action surge, which is effectively an action point.
But yes, Second wind, also.
>>46667592
>>46667574
Long Death monk works that way, but Fiendlock requires a hostile target. If the DM decides the rat is non-hostile, he can't use the ability.
(Similarly, a MLD can smack his low-health ally unconscious and get the THP, where a Fiendlock could not).
>>46669156
I don't think anyone's saying that martials can't be simplistic. There just also need to be complicated options as well, with as much variety as casters bring to the table.
Champion "Well Alex, I think I'll hit it with my Stick again, turn after turn" fighters can coexist along with something like the 4e warlord. The problem is that there is no adequate option like the 4e warlord in the current system.
Again, it's not a flaw that there are simplistic martial options. That's great. I'm glad that playstyle is being catered to. But there are no adequately complicated martial options.
>>46669222
Battlemaster is pretty meh. The options you get with superiority die are pretty meh. If I had my way, the superiority die would be baseline for all martial classes. Then one archetype per martial would trade them in for higher damage and not have access to them. Meanwhile, every other archetype gets archetype specific maneuvers, which are mechanically acquired similarly to invocations.
>>46664446
If they're a magic user, they think magic is as cool as shit.
They have this cool thing they can do, that can literally manipulate the fabric of reality. That's awesome! They tend to get annoyed when people are all "Oooo magic is strange and scary, there's always a price."
Pic related for my one bard character
Anyone use orcpub?
I can't figure out how to import a file that I worked on to edit.
>>46669283
>Battlemaster is pretty meh.
>>46669278
Easy fix: they're starving rats and they bite anything that comes near them.
>>46669177
What if we say Monks with Tavern Brawler can utilize either the the TB grapple or the MA extra attack with their reaction instead of a bonus action? It's not like you ALWAYS use your reaction every round, and while that's still stepping on toes with other uses of your reaction, it's at least something.
>i use my reaction to grapple the guy with Tavern Brawler if i ever land a punch
>i punch a guy
>twice
>i bonus action to Martial Arts punch a third time
>one of those hit, so now I'm going to grapple with my reaction
I want to play a Paladin Favoured Soul Sorcerer in an upcoming campaign. Anyone got suggestions on how many levels I should put in each class?
>>46668247
> You cast hex
> Except you don't cast hex
Wording needs work.
>>46669241
We've lost a lot of Mearl's articles about it on the official website, but it gets mentioned in this interview
http://www.rpgcodex.net/content.php?id=8309
>>46669426
>Applies a Hex effect on the target as though he was a victim of the spell
Or something like that
Also the rambling about martials and casters makes me want to build a dilettante Battlemaster. Ritual Caster, Magic Initiate for Vicious Mockery and Prestidigitation.
>>46669177
I wouldn't have much issue with that if it weren't for the Aarakocra (my beloved birds). If TB upgrades the damage die, the bird-men should as well. With both at top levels, it becomes either a d14 (weird), 2d8 (upgrade from 2d6 instead of 1d12, less weird), or d20 (the next highest in single dice the system has, like with HP with size).
>>46669283
I'm with you on the martial stuff, but Battlemaster is incredible. I have had fantastic fun with it over two characters and feel it's one of the few means for martials to do some fantastic stuff that casters can't easily touch. They get to apply all sorts of status effects while still doing damage, are generally not penalized for attempts because most things are "if you hit, you can spend" instead of the other way around, and there is a lot of synergy with Action Surge that allows Battlemasters to really bully enemies and put a major hurting on with both damage and conditions.
While it's true they're nowhere near the flash of 4E attacks or Bo9S maneuvers, Fighters also aren't as basically boring there, and 5E maneuvers recharge quickly enough. If your DM works with you and allows you to be awesome, things like Pushing Attack can get really fun with just the barest allowance (knocking enemies upwards and letting them fall for more damage) or become even more absurd if you follow through with other physical requirements or roll confirmations (exactly how hard are you throwing a javelin if it knocks an orc backwards 15 feet? would it go through him? could you conceivably pin him to a wall if his back is already next to it?).
I actually pity all non-BMs a bit.
>>46668671
you forgot to add in the proficiency bonus to damage they mentioned.
1 + STR + PROFICIENCY. so up to 12, not amazing but a bit better
>>46669492
And that's another reason why it shouldn't stack
The MA die gets bigger because you learn more advanced techniques
The tavern brawler die you get because you can throw a good punch, no technique or anything involved
And the aarakocra get to use their dagger-like talons to hit
All different sources of better damage, all mutually exclusive
>>46669531
>Fighters also aren't as basically boring there
I meant here. 5E martials are definitely cooler all things considered than plain Jane 3X.
>>46669531
IME, the "do something awesome" specs like BM and Thief (and now Swashbuckler) are more fun than the 1/3 caster specs. If you want magic you're better off using feats imo.
Also how is Purple Knight?
>>46669414
Paladin 2/Sorc X gives you heavy armour, smites, and you trail behind full casters by two spell levels and one spell slot level.
Paladin 6/7(Ancients) gives you all the tanking goodies you might want, and lets you use Find Steed, but delays your sorc spellcasting a fair amount, and if you're going Ancients you could probably stand to go the full Paladin 8.
So if you want to be a spellcaster with some ability to smite people in the face, Paladin 2/Sorc X. If you want to be a durable frontline combatant, go Paladin 6/8 and the rest in Sorc.
>>46669567
Logically I don't see why learning more advanced techniques wouldn't stack with having daggers for talons. Talon techniques! I get why that's dumb for general balance (or would be if Monks weren't so... so-so), but still.
>>46669595
Increasing damage die and damage in general was definitely a part of specialization in 2e; fighter grandmastery increased the damage die by one grade on top of the bonuses from mastery.
It feels like more champion's thing though.
>>46669570
>Purple Dragon Knight
Boring as shit. You can already have Knightly stature as any other Fighter option and there are means to get the proficiencies PDK allows as well. All you really miss out there is what is essentially Expertise on one of them, but that's not helping you do new and cool stuff, but just making you fail less at it. And even having that Expertise may not mean you're the best at it in the party if there's a Rogue or Bard.
Bulwark comes in at such a high level you're unlikely to ever see it, and it's entirely possible it will never come up ONCE, since you have to blow your own use to affect another (so if you weren't affected, you can't help an ally; if you are affected and no one else is, this feature doesn't even come into play).
Rallying Cry enables a single extra swing or shot from an ally when you blow Surge. It's extra, sure, but this is such a tiny benefit, and Battlemasters can already enable allies similarly (at the cost of one of their own attacks) with Commander's Strike. I just can't get excited about it.
Rally Cry is really the only ability to write home about, and it's a meager heal (your Fighter level) to three allies when you Second Wind. Inspiring Leader already accomplishes this better in advance (Fighter level + CHA to SIX people, including yourself) and can be used just as often. If it came down to being a Battlemaster who took Inspiring Leader or a PDK who took Martial Adept, I'd go with the Battlemaster every single time.
>>46669725
>Fighter level + CHA to SIX people
Was there errata to limit Inspiring Leader to 6 people?
>>46669725
So basically worse than just taking a Bard 2 dip as Battlemaster, okay. Kind of sad.
>>46669764
Isn't that how it's always been? This is PHB.
>>46669794
Fug, I've missed that numerous times. I've been having it work for every friendly creature within 30 feet of the user.
>>46669586
You could mix in Bard levels to get shillelagh and other goodies maybe? It takes a lot of levels, and you won't get higher level spells, but it's not like you really need the sorc levels once you got quicken + the elemental damage boost from sorc.
Then again, if you want to wear plate you would have high-ish STR anyway, so you don't need shillelagh to be as SAD.
Or you could get it for 3 levels in UL Tome warlock just to GFB even harder.
>>46669825
How often does having more creatures than six come up?unless you're a Magic Initiate Fighter who is casting Speak With Animals before Inspiring Leadering the fucking forest, which now that I think about it, is incredible
>>46669068
if casters worked the same way martials do, then everyone would have the same basic access to magic (without having to invest in feats or subclasses, but as a basic skill that anyone can use, with success determined by proficiency and ability scores), but casters would get a range of class features that make them better at using magic. so a fighter or wizard can both use the same spells using the same magic subsystem, but the wizard would have the magic equivalent of extra attack or expertise. ultimately the wizard would be as better at magic as the fighter is at attacking, and in practice the fighter would not use spells much for the same reason the wizard doesn't often try and smash open doors with his fists, but in theory it would be avaliable to them. and in the same way the wizard (or more plausibly a cleric) can invest in 20 STR and smash through doors as reliably as a fighter, the fighter can invest in 20 INT and cast high-level spells, but without the bells and whistles a wizard gets.
>>46669911
>Disney Princess archetype
>>46669973
>>46667232
So you choose to be an obtuse faggot?
>>46669973
Is it sad I kind of want to make a character built around this...
Swashbuckler could be good with this, actually. High Charisma for its features, Panache to prevent massacres of your squirrels through disadvantage, and archery...
