/5eg/ D&D Fifth Edition General
- Home
- Board: /tg/ - Traditional Games
- Reading: /5eg/ D&D Fifth Edition General
Free ice cream edition
>Official /5eg/ Mega Trove v3:
https://mega.nz/#F!BUdBDABK!K8WbWPKh6Qi1vZSm4OI2PQ
>Pastebin with homebrew list, resources and so on:
http://pastebin.com/X1TFNxck
>/5eg/ Discord server
https://discord.gg/0rRMo7j6WJoQmZ1b
Old adventure module: >>47356515 →
Which old modules would you most like to see ported to fifth edition?
Tomb of Horrors is kind of a cliche at this point, but it's basically a tradition at this point for my group to play it once every few years or so.
I have a hard time imaging how it would run in 5e.
>>47377126
>Which old modules would you most like to see ported to fifth edition?
I've never really played any of the official adventures. Honestly, I'd just like to see some real support for any setting other than fucking Forgotten Realms.
>>47377285
My friend actually only runs premade adventures, and I was lucky enough for him to do a bit of a showcase of several of the classic adventures.
They're rather hit and miss, but there is something about the shared experience that makes them interesting. Finding someone else who can discuss going through White Plume Mountain is a neat "same hat" moment, and it's always nice to go through where people died in your run through the Tomb of Horrors.
>>47377126
I like the "greatest hits" feel WotC is going for: dragons, elemental evil, underdark demons, I6 Ravenloft, and next is giants.
It would be interesting to do something bonkers like Apocalypse Stone or really just an off the wall high level game.
>>47377126
>filename
I feel triggered
>>47377813
>Apocalypse Stone
Funny you should mention that, I've literally set up my entire campaign around my players playing that module once they get to high enough levels.
>>47377126
Help me out here /tg/.
Today I went to my local game shop for a rando/pick me up type of game. Foolishly, I came in ready to play DnD 5e, but the only game available was PF. I'm a rookie who barely got introduced into 5e, so being taught on the spot rules for PF Sucked ass.
Can anyone just please help me get my DnD fix? My last group hasn't met up in 4 weeks and I've been getting radio silence ever about next session.
Or am I forever doomed to never play again?
>>47380599
If you don't mind playing online, roll20 is a good place to search for a game.
>>47380663
I've been lurking on /tg/ for a bit, and people got some horror stories about it.
What is it actually like?
>>47380705
Pretty meh. Just go into it with the same expectations as if you were going to the FLGS in a new city.
>>47380795
Fair enough. Does the community mind/tolerate text only? I'm obviously comfortable playing DnD and stuff, but role playing while living with my folks doesn't sit well with me. Mainly just the vocal part.
>>47377285
I'd LOVE to see a 5e edition of Expedition to the Barrier Peaks. Really neat module, and I think t wouldn't be too out of place for 5e.
>>47380705
Dude, if you're fucking inbred enough to beg /tg/ for a game, you really are in no place to judge the shit you hear about Roll20.
>>47380835
>mind/tolerate text only
I hate this place so fucking much.
>>47380883
I'm not Judging numbnuts. But when all you hear about "Mount Rapeface" is its unusually high production of shit, then you would at least like to know from said locals, IF it is as bad as people say it is.
>>47377281
>I have a hard time imaging how it would run in 5e.
How come?
>>47380945
Yes, it is as bad.
Yes, you would fit right in.
No, the people on /tg/ are not better.
>>47380959
Thank you.
Just wanted an answer on that.
>>47380835
You have to be either patient or lucky to find a good group. Sure there are a lot of weird ones around, and I've had some bad experiences, but it isn't always bad. As the other anon said, it's playing with strangers after all.
I've seen some games that were text only here and there. I prefer to use voice, but if that's your thing, roll20 has a search engine with options to look for text only games.
which thread are we posting in?
this or >>47376541
>>47381042
You have any good experience with it? I mean obviously you're recommending it, but how would you personally rate it?
Why is downtime so much fun? I'm relatively new to DMing, about 10-15 sessions in to my first campaign, and the first half of today's session was entirely the players going around the city to stores and interacting with people and it was the most fun I or my players have had so far. Am I just shitty at designing dungeons and combat encounters or is downtime always this great?
>>47381146
I've noticed the same thing. The sessions where the players just dicker around the town are the ones that everyone has the most fun on, and the ones where we go dungeon delving are kind of boring.
I suspect it's beczuse I try to actully put some life into my NPCs (I do voices, act out their mannerisms, etc.), and the players all have pretty well developed characters. Is that the same for you?
>>47381134
What do you think?
>>47380835
first off don't be such a lil bitch and just get on the mic, nobody cares that your voice sounds like it's 400lbs and/or 14 years old
second you can filter by text/voice/ voice and video. However there is very few text games and they just won't be as good as a game with voice.
I have played in three groups on r20, one was terrible with a GM who couldn't even RP or improv a fucking general store, second is ongoing and is running an old adventure module and is a blast since we're not concerned with RP and are just killing some orcs, and the other game is the best group i've been with, everyone is super into it and the DM is great if a bit restrictive rules-wise
just go in and make some friends. Avoid obviously bad campaigns (easily identified by a very short/poorly written description of the campaign, and conversely also easily identified by an extremely long over-written description with six pages of rules, a PDF form for applications, and a bunch of retarded rules like "talking in combat costs a bonus action")
be a relaxed, fun guy, don't breath/eat chips into your fucking mic
>>47381239
Yeah, there was definitely much more personality in all the shopkeepers and other NPCs than in any combat encounters or anything.
>>47381247
Thanks mate. I was more worried about my parents hearing me role play. But I guess it can be worse. I'll definitely give it a shot though.
>>47381406
you can specifically also filter for games welcoming new players, though most games don't care if you just tell them you're new up front
I'd suggest doing a couple one-shots before committing to an actual game
alright guys, i've been thinking about how to fic the martial.caster disparity and i think ive got it.
All you need to do is make spells take a number of turns equal to their level to cast. Boom. Disparity solved. Because now the martials need to defend the casters or else the caster is toste. Teamwork, done.
Does it fix the problem? My party is going to be getting up to level 4 soon and I really don't want to be left behind
>>47381509
Is this a joke or for reals?
the combat segment system should stay dead
>>47381509
It's funny that I was thinking about this same concept earlier today, but the problem with it is that it would become really pretty boring to play a spellcaster in battle. It's not a very good solution for that reason alone.
>>47381509
martials tend to dominate at lvs5-10 from my experience
>>47381547
So you don't think my dm will like it?
>>47381509
You know, just play the game. You won't be left behind, ask the DM later on if you feel like your character isn't doing much o perhaps throws scenarios that can also suit other characters.
>>47381509
That's... amazingly retarded. You should probably kill yourself. 5e casters are already weaker than 1e or OD&D casters.
>>47381737
"hey dm, I thought of a way to make playing any sort of spellcaster (80% of the game's classes, every class actually can get spells of some sort) a fucking massive chore because some people get massively butthurt about how hitting something with a sword is not as good as a throwing a 20ft fireball"
gee whiz.
also are you a martial player trying to pass this shit off? if so then top fucking lel, you came with that at my table and I'd laugh you out of my house
>>47381857
pretty sure he's just shitposting
>>47381137
I had luck and found a good group on the first game I joined. The DM wanted to do only a one-shot, but we had so much fun we decided to find another DM to pick it up from there (we were playing Lost Mines of Phandelver). The game kept going until our new DM simply stopped responding to us. After two months, I called the other players and suggested we find yet another DM to finish the module. We did, and he is doing well for someone who picked up a game half way through.
In the meantime I tried finding other games and had a lot of fun playing two one shots with the same group but different DMs. Also had some bad games and that is when I managed to find a game that already didn't have so many applications that it would be futile to try.
At some point I ran out of patience and decided to DM myself for the first time ever, running Hoard of the Dragon Queen. The first sessions were shit, but after I got a better understanding of things it's been going well.
>>47381509
Martials and casters are on-par with each other in combat. The problem is not combat power, but out-of-combat utility and their ability to interact with the campaign world.
Your fix fixes nothing, it just makes playing a caster more complicated and annoying.
>>47381953
this is hilarious
"magic is overpowered so I've given magic to every class in the game"
all these "martial powers" do is emulate stuff that magic users can do. It's just magic. Call it "martial powers" if you want, you've just given magic to everyone.
if you want to actually make martials more versatile, go class by class and give them unique features and shit instead of just tacking on straight up magic for everyone.
>>47382054
Not him, but most of those aren't spells, retard. The religion oriented guidance one is fairly stupid and un martial.
For people griping the OP of casting, just fuckin' roll a low-magic setting. If your players want to roll a caster, limit what classes and/or spells they can pick. Personally, I'd limit to clerics, warlocks, and DUSTY OLD wizards. And with the Ws, one or the other.
No spells for the martials.
>But muh paladin!
Fuck 'im, play a cleric, bitch. I suppose you could keep Way of Shadows for the monk, but why not play a rogue at that point?
BUT I DON'T KNOW SHIT, I'VE NEVER DM'D BEFORE! Plus my fucking sorcerer is a piece of shit.
That's what I've got.
>>47382291
>castrating paladins
>allowing clerics
For what conceivable purpose?
Is this a picture of you?
>>47382373
I don't see the point in a dipper of two pots. Fuck paladins. You want a religion police or what-shit, roll a fighter like that.
It's a picture of Bendydick Cuminsnatch, you pleb.
>>47382447
Interesting. So why do you shit on melee guys and cherish full casters so much? Has too much third edition and Pathfinder rotted your brain? Or do you just love imbalance and hate fun?
>religion police
Apply yourself.
I didn't think martials and casters were too unbalanced in 5e. Was I wrong?
>>47382447
You misunderstand the insult, anon. That other-anon was asking if the picture he posted was you. I assume other-anon was calling you a Jew and that he cares little for the Jews.
I also think no paladins in a low magic setting is dumb. I would have more paladins than clerics because clerics get more magic.
>>47382514
They're not that unbalanced. Talk about 5e can be slow so any problems in the system are magnified.
>>47382514
Its much better than 3.X, and it pretty much works well in single digit levels, but it breaks entirely at 10+.
>>47382549
The picture is of a wizard who views muggles as nothing more than gentile livestock. On the other hand, he lets them NEET around in his fabulous city of magic so long as they don't mind having minute amounts of life force sapped for magic energy.
>>47382514
They're the weakest from any edition, including AD&D, OSR and B/x, but people are extremely upset because fighters can't teleport.
>>47382514
It's honestly fine, over the course of an adventuring day you won't notice much difference. And during downtime when the Wizard says he wants to cast Guards and Wards a million times and set up a Teleportation circle in his tower for the next year, you tell him that's nice and then set the party's next adventure a month's travel away from home.
>>47381927
I'm currently in the same situation as you with running HoTDQ as my first DM thing. Am I just retarded, or is chapter 4 either ass or kind of difficult to do well?
Return to The Tomb of Horrors would be pretty sweet, although I suspect it would be pretty neutered.
>>47384115
>is chapter 4 either ass
HotDragQueen is universally accepted as the worst 5e module yet. So yeah, when in doubt, assume that the module is shit.
Are there any guidelines on how much reward a party should be getting?
This is our first 5e adventure, and the party (of 5) has just reached lvl 4. So far I've given them around 70 gp between them, and 2 magic items (one of which is modest, and the other is cursed so no long term viability). I think maybe I give them too little.
>>47384416
>kek
Yeah, read the DMG, half that shit is treasure tables.
On the one hand, it does recommend your party have a significantly higher amount of shit at this point. On the other hand you;re the DM so if you want to give them way less that's totally up to you.
>>47381857
>>47382661
Not the guy you guys were replying to, but I didn't realize casters were so weak in this edition. How much weaker are they than in AD&D?
>>47384435
>so if you want to give them way less that's totally up to you.
There are people on /tg/ who will throw 300-post temper tantrums over not following WBL to the letter.
>>47382677
fighter should be running a keep by lvl 9.
this has NEVER changed. and it's now spelled out in crayon under the concept of "tiers of play"
Anybody have any advice on making combat more interesting for the players? I'm in essentially the same position as>>47381146, >>47381239. My combats are [retty bpring for everyone involved, and my players mainly like dicking around with NPCs
>>47384416
I advise you to go nuts and try shit out. magic items can be stolen in the night, or blow up. characters can be killed and new ones made.
After I bought 5e i flat out warned my players that this was a beta test and shit was gonna go south quick. they had fun.
>>47384416
It sounds like you're giving them too little, if you ask me. You're free to do whatever, but keep in mind that the players won't have easy access to things like healing potions or exploration equipment when you're designing encounters and adventures. "Go warn the king of coming war" as an adventure is a hell of a lot harder when all five players combined can only afford one horse.
>>47384486
more interesting monsters, maybe more weak ones, or a nice big menacing big bad
but i would note, there are literally RP systems that are what you're saying, where combat takes a bigger back seat and "fluffing things out" is better
i dont know if its true for current, but exalted had a system where if you could interestingly enough describe a cool event during combat, you can do it with a roll and the dm decides how easy it happens, THEN you actually fight
throw a hammer at a foe? roll the dice
throw a chakram in a cave bounding it off stalagmite to stalagmite to catch the hiding wizard in full cover unawares? "RP" roll then attack roll
>>47384435
>Yeah, read the DMG, half that shit is treasure tables.
I know, but I can't find anything about what is reasonable as an accumulated total. 4e had tables about what you should approaximately have earned at each lvl.
Our adventure is relatively light on combat encounters, and they lvl up by milestones. If I just use the random loot tables they'd probably end up light on loot too.
>>47384486
combat is just inherently kinda boring. nothing you can do about the fact that your players are essentially waiting for their turn to do math.
best advice i can give is to keep the combats short.
>>47384486
First and most simply of all, act out the enemies. If your goblins aren't screeching about having some skin-and-bone stew tonight DURING the fight, you're doing something wrong. Nothing more boring than a fight with a silent block of HP.
Other things that can spice up combat:
>using environment
Don't be afraid to throw down some Difficult Terrain, or encounters on rocky crags that require climbing, or windy day battles that lead projectiles astray. Don't let your battles take place in a plain, clean, white room.
>enemy strategies
The lone kobold hobbles around the corner, trailing blood. The Fighter reels around the same corner, greatsword in hand and bloodlust in his heart, but WHAM! Five kobolds with crossbows and prepared actions let loose a volley onto their unsuspecting victim. Enemies that use traps, positioning, items, and reinforcements are TONS more interesting that stand-and-attack puppets.
>attack descriptions
As a GM, I know exactly how easy it is to fall into the rut of "Roll attack. You hit. Enemy attacks. It hits. Take 10 damage." Spice it up with some imagery if you don't already. Maybe that 2 damage blow that the Fighter took from the orc was a great swing of an axe that shook that fighter's whole shield arm. Perhaps the attack that missed was instead a chance that the Giant took to bellow a mighty roar. Just remember, "hits" and "hit points" are just abstractions. Look at the number on the damage die, and describe something fitting for that much damage. Also keep in mind that describing every attack as a "cut, but he's still up" is very dull. Like I just said, ABSTRACTION is the name of the game. Cuts and bruises cause minor hit point loss, but so do things like sprains, getting the wind knocked out of you, pulling up your shield in an awkward and painful way, and having your armor stop the blade, but not the force.
>>47384659
Slight continuation here, but also remember to let the players describe their attacks as well! Ask the wizard what his sleep spell looks like. Is it a puff of dust that appears in front of each affected enemies eyes, or maybe a small wisp that dances from target to target? And how is the fighter fighting? What stances does he take, how does he swing, what openings does he leave to bait the enemy? Unfortunately, this is where you'll have to be carefully sure to make the players aware what is and isn't ok. That Fireball spell isn't going to look like the God of the sun appearing before the enemies and attacking them with 999 spears of light, just like how that 5 damage attack from the fighter isn't going to be ripping any spines out. Be careful to not be too dismissive of player involvement in descriptions, but also be firmly clear in what is and isn't ok for the tone of your game and the level of abstraction.
>>47384571
Page 38 should give a rough idea
>>47381509
That makes cantrips a free action, right? Fuck fireball, I firebolt everything I can see 100 times each.
>>47380948
Mostly the way traps and instant death are handled.
(Whoa, two threads created 40 minutes apart from each other, what are the odds)
Just out of curiosity, is there any book or official writing from WotC that add some of the spells from Elemental Evil to the Way of the Four Elements Monk's "spell list"?
I mean, it make a lot of sense the way I see it...
>>47385506
>(Whoa, two threads created 40 minutes apart from each other, what are the odds)
High, some moron made this thread because the other one made him sperg out.
>>47385506
Confusingly, no.
Wot4E Monks got absolutely nothing from Elemental Evil, further compounding just how terrible of an archetype it is.
At this point it needs a complete overhaul to be viable.
>>47385567
The other thread was started by the persistent shitposter responsible for Aaracokra grappler/AT is the only worthwhile Rogue archetype/"A girl turned me down, how do I kill her character in game".
If you let him establish himself we'll never get rid of him.
>>47385567
The other thread is literally spergs on parade.
>>47377281
We ran a couple of sessions tree months ago in 5e.
I don't see any problems with it
>>47384416
I had the same problem at first. But really there is now right way to do it as long as it isn't too extrime.
As for me, i gave players approximately this
1 Lvl they got a magic sword +1 and a stuff. Uncommon each. Plus potions and 200 gold (6 people party)
2 Lvl they got nothing
3 Lvl they found +1 cloak
4 Lvl they found a vial of poison worth 2000 gold, speed boots and more goldThey had a miniature adventure over it. They didn't know the real cost and alchemist was trying to buy it for 400 gold. They rolled for perseption. He was excited, so they refused. Then alchemist started begging them to buy it for 650 gold. He was ready to sell his house. But they refused againg. Later that night he stole that vial. A lot of time they were trying to find him. One day they found a corpse with that vile in a trolls cave. They have also found a non-sent letter, where this guy wrote that he found a way to pay his debt. So they've got to sell it on lvl 6
I probably gave them too much, but it didn't cause any problems. We had fun and that's what matters.
>>47385577
What about just increasing the amount of Ki points they get?
>>47380883
y u heff 2 b mad?
>>47386197
No. Just look for that one " Wot4E monk revised" PDF.
I got it on my PC but can't upload it now since i'm away from home.
It includes fixes to the current "spells" making Fangs of the fire snake for example cost no ki for base damage and extended range by 5 ft, works with MA bonus action attack and can be fluried.
They also get mold earth etc. as free cantrips.
Pretty great stuff and the names are hillarious.
>>47386197
Doesn't solve the inherent problem that none of their abilities are worth using over just attacking+flurrying every round, and that their abilities are just actual spells that the wizard will cast more effectively and much earlier for proportionally far fewer resources, and don't synergise with the Monk features at all. Paladin, hell even Ranger gets around being a half caster by having unique spellsuntil the bard steals themthat fit their theme and scale better in the late game, but Wot4E Monks get nothing but scraps. Meanwhile the other Monk archetypes get interesting features like teleporting through darkness and the only true save-or-die in the game.
>>47384115
HotDQ has many flaws. I have searched for several guides to help me run it, and they have helped me immensely. This one was the best so far: http://thecampaign20xx.blogspot.com.br/2014/10/tyranny-of-dragons-guide-to-hoard-of.html?m=0
Chapter 4 is very slow and can become boring, what I'm doing is I set the schedule of what's happening next session in advance and just skip the uneventful days, unless the players decide to do something such as chat with NPCs, harvest herbs to brew poison, try to craft something (only simple stuff), etc.
I try to have two or three of the random encounters per session, one of them involving combat. In combatI crank up the difficulty without giving them more XP, because otherwise having one fight per day makes it too easy when they can just blow through all their resources.
>>47386022
I think maybe I should irk on the light side. Since there isn't much combat, they hardly use health potions, and equipment is less important.
Why are we posting in two different threads again?
>>47386884
just pick one to hide
or hide both, its not like anything meaningful ever gets discussed here any way
>>47386904
I am trying, but I'm on mobile and the more threads there are, the slower the browser gets and the more battery drain there is
>>47386502
I don't really think having "unique" spells is really all that important.
>>47386022
>1 Lvl they got a magic sword +1
That sounds crazy early to find a +1 weapon. Even in other editions it's a bit much.
So I'm designing a frontier town (heavily Wild West themed, guns and horses included). Not going to go into detail since it was ignored last time.
Any advice for fun characters, places, events, outlying areas etc?
>>47387550
Clint Eastwood parody.
>>47377126
Hey /tg/ what are those wall demon things?
What happens if you stick your hand in one?
>>47387602
ookada ijiri will lick it
>>47387602
You get free ice cream.
>>47385638
No, actually I made it yesterday while drunk since /tg/ is pretty shit making new /5eg/s once the current one starts autosaging. I totally forgot to throw in a thread question in the OP though because, well, booze...
>>47387734
Maybe you should not make the threads from now on. Also, could you adopt a tripcode?
>>47387577
Working on it. I have one based on John Wayne!
>>47387734
>>47387780
Either way, the other guy seems to be contained in that thread so we can at least have a brief respite.
>>47387780
Why would I ever use a trip? :) You've created some sort of strawman that I'm the aarakocra mongoloid though, that sperg using a trip would certainly make filtering him easier but he's got such a recognizable writing style that it's not really needed.
And I've made like half of the last 8 threads, when /5eg/ is teetering deep down page 10. This board is simply shit at making new ones. :^)
>>47387868
If you want people to extend to you the benefit of the doubt, don't be a dumbass.
Considering all you've done so far is admit to being a dumbass, but not a particular dumbass, you still should do us all a favor and adopt a trip.
>>47387910
You gotta better up on those Persuasion checks.
>>47387550
Take old Kurosawa films and unabashedly steal the plots.
>>47385577
So, anybody has ideas about how to do it? I'd love to see a couple extrabendingdisciplines, specially water and earth themed ones that got a lot of love from Elemental Evil
>>47381146
It's open ended exploration.
The same kinds of things can happen at an adventure site if there's more to explore than
>objects that are almost certainly dangerous
>hostile monsters who fight to the death
>>47384659
>Don't be afraid to throw down some Difficult Terrain, or encounters on rocky crags that require climbing, or windy day battles that lead projectiles astray. Don't let your battles take place in a plain, clean, white room.
I don't use a mat, and that actually makes anything other than plain rooms and outdoors a real hassle. I do try to change it up, but keeping track of just the party and their enemies is hard enough, even without keeping track of objects and awkward parts of the terrain.
>>47388285
Using a mat is more than worth it. I borrowed one from a friend for a few sessions and it made drawing battle plans so much easier.
Admittedly, I was using graph paper before, with tiny shitty squares, but still, using a mat was very liberating.
>>47384659
>Also keep in mind that describing every attack as a "cut, but he's still up" is very dull.
I've been having some trouble with this myself. The temptation to make every hit to HP an actual, physical wound is really strong. That's my bad.
I also run into the confusing question of how to vary spell descriptions, and especially ranged attacks. If the bad guy has a sword, he can do any number of things with it, but if the goblin has a bow and arrow he's just going to keep shooting at you and hitting you in different spots. Any ideas for that?
>>47388000
This worked for my Star Wars campaign, and I expect I will continue to do this.
>>47388141
Just gooogle what one of the anons above posted.
"Wot4E monk revised" it covers rverything in EE and reworks how some of the existing disciplines work.
Each time you gain monk tradition features you learn one of the cantrips Gust/Mold earth/Control fire/Control water as well as 2 disciplines.
They also reworked Water whip, Fist of unbroken air and Fangs of the fire snake.
Examples:
Water whip - cost 1 ki - range 15 ft - bonus action - forces dex save deals 1d10 bludgeon on unsucessfull save and pulls target 10 ft, half damage and no secondary effect on successfull save.
Fangs of the fire snake - no cost - initiated as part of an unarmed strike - unarmed strikes deal fire damage and range is extended by 5 ft (can use MA bonus action attack with it as well as flurry and spend an extra 1 ki for extra 1d10 fire damage)
Fist of unbroken air - cost 1 ki - action - 60 ft range - deals 3d(MA die) forces dex save for half damage and knocks target prone on failure.
They also reworked a lot of the utillity spells and their costs.
Look it up. It's the best monk home-brew i've seen so far.
>>47388594
Unsurprising, considering Star Wars was originally based on the Hidden Fortress.
>>47381509
Martial-caster disparity has nothing to do with combat in 5E. They actually fixed that this time around. It's the other "pillars" of the game, exploration and social interaction, where martials fall behind. Pretty much every tool they have to solve problems or do interesting shit out of combat is equal-access to casters because it's just basic rules shit like "you can make a Diplomacy check" or "you can try to jump this gap", but martials don't get to use spells. They can also fail their purely physical tasks (this gap is 40 feet long, roll an Athletics check DC Whatever to beat it; oh, you failed) while spells being used as their descriptions dictate cannot fuck up (Levitate / Fly will always get you across that gap) as long as the caster has full and accurate information about the task.
>>47387602
You can find an awesome sphere of annihilation there
>>47389012
While it's "equal-access", martials typically have the better physical scores, especially fighters in particular.
They may fall behind in social interaction, but it's often the spellcasters who fall behind in routine exploration, since they only have so many spells and they can only do so much.
5e really makes it so that your ability scores really matter, and if you've got an 8 in strength, you're definitely going to end up feeling that.
>>47389164
The only thing 5E does on the ability score front is remove the casters' ability to buff their own to obscene levels, generally higher than those of the martials. It does nothing to alleviate the problem that is the enormous range of success that a d20 covers. It's hard to get excited about having to roll a whopping 2-3 points lower to succeed compared to the Wizard who can't even throw goblins.
>>47389232
The Advantage/Disadvantage system does actually make even a few points rather significant. With training in a skill and a good stat, you might be 4-6 points higher than someone else in the party, and that's gigantic when its applied to two separate rolls.
>>47382550
Perhaps the same can be said of all games.
>>47389284
And if martials got advantage on all their physical checks outside of combat to do shit that might mean something, but the class features which do grant advantage to skills (and the skills they work on) are few and far between.
>>47389396
I guess it might depend on how generous your DM is with dishing out advantage/disadvantage.
Even without it, though, a few points is a bigger deal than it was in previous editions, and partially because those points are so hard to come by. it's one of those things that doesn't seem significant at first, but over time you start to recognize things like even one or two points added to your AC make an enormous difference in how often you get hit.
>>47381509
If you really have to, you could use Speed Factor initiative. Casting spells gives an initiative penalty based on the level of the spell.
>>47385506
Not anything official, but I quite like this redux version. It does what you suggested, and adds in some cantrips and such.
>>47389164
>>47389232
That's why my group has started using d12+d8 for ability checks and attack rolls. It makes you actually stop and think "hmm, I have a reasonable chance of succeeding on this?"
Then again, my players are pretty young and impulsive, so maybe most people already do.
I'm also planning on doing a wild west themed campaign. How do you plan on implementing/balancing guns?
>>47382054
News flash: the only thing that can differentiate a caster thing and a martial thing is flavor. If you disapprove of martials having things that resemble spells, you disapprove of martials having anything beyond "i hit thing".
My players want an adventure full of political intrigue. What are some fun ways I can ease them into this?
The setting is extremely low magic (players can't have any) and generic medieval fantasy. I've asked them all to have nice surface lives, but a corrupt underside. So far I've got a brewer that moonlights as a brewer and a diplomat that runs a well-to-do whorehouse.
I've suggested my other players make things like a corrupt guard, a tax collector, or a spy.
For whatever reason, my players are going to band together and attempt to generate massive amounts of civil unrest in a rival city-state. What are some fun ways I could plan for that they could go about this?
>>47389848
This.
Guy is reading a martial power that grants flying move speed. WHAT THE FUCK, MARTIALS CAN'T FLY, THAT'S BULLSHIT, THAT'S MAGIC.
Except it's actually, you know, jumping. They fall at the end of their turn. They just have a "flying move speed" because that's the mechanical term for being able to effortlessly bound over a 20 foot pit or to the top of a third story building.
And exactly how a PC accomplishes this super jumping can be handled a number of ways. A ripped Barbarian might just kick the ground so hard he rockets up, a Monk might wuxia flutter through the air like he's walking an invisible tightrope at 3x speed, and a Rogue might just run up the wall.
>>47386502
Okay, hold up hold up. I think Way of the Four Elements is by far the worst Monk path too, but saying that what they get is bad isn't really true. Sure Fireball at level 14 isn't anything to write home about but they do get some solid utility in spells like Fly, Gaseous Form, and even some okay damage enhancements with Fangs of the Fire snake (water whip was cool too since it was a bonus action but the errata to that made it pretty shitty; i would have just made fist of unbroken air and water whip both bonus actions).
the problem is ki is a really limited resource and you don't really get a lot of elemental disciplines. Way of the Open Hand is better in combat and I'd say that Way of the Shadow beats 4Elements utility.
>>47389962
It's nerds wanting their super smart wizards to be able to do things those dumb jocks can't because the only thing you have to do to be a fighter is hit someone with a piece of metal, not be trained or athletic or commanding or smart, just like with football so fuck you Chad I never got over high school.
>>47389679
does this fix the problems with four elements being complete shit?
I've got a player in my group desperate to play one.
>>47389848
>>47389962
>>47390016
Nice strawmen.
>>47389802
Meant for
>>47387550
>>47390016
>>47389962
the problem with them is that they're universally available to half the classes in the game and a good chunk of them are stupid bullshit too.
>>47389899
>The setting is extremely low magic (players can't have any)
In 5e? That leaves literally 3 classes available, with two subclasses each. I don't think 5e is the system for low-magic games. I managed to cobble together something decent in Pathfinder, but it would be hard to differentiate characters very well in 5e. There just aren't enough options yet.
>>47390122
Sorry, summoning strawmen sounds like magic, I don't think my martial ass can handle that.
>>47389802
I would probably just use the Crossbow rules and call them single action guns.
>>47390130
I'm aware. Most of the characters are going to be rogues with maybe a fighter or ranger or two. We're just using the system because my players are new and this is what they're most familiar with.
>>47390130
fighter, rogue, and...barbarian maybe???
i mean, path of the totem is obviously magical, but i feel like the base barbarian has a supernatural aspect to them anyways. Maybe you could get away with playing the Mystic. It's not magic! it's ESP!
>>47390214
>or ranger
I assume you're allowing the spell-less Ranger variant, then?
>>47390129
So... like magic.
>>47390222
>path of the totem is obviously magical
That's a good point, the Barbarian only has one archetype unless you trade out the rituals on the Totem one for something else.
I don't really see any of the other bits as overtly magical, though.
>>47390263
the difference is that those classes are entirely based around magic. you're giving the fighter magic too, but you're not giving them anything in return. It's the exact opposite of what was wrong with 3.5.
Hell, the person who feels it the worst is probably the Warlock, since they're already on the lower end of flexibility and now the big stupid fighter and barbarian can cast about as well as he can.
>>47390245
Yes. I'm not too concerned with the classes my players choose. Combat should be extremely limited. I'm wondering what sorts of social engagements I can get them into where roleplay for political reasons can be fun.
I've already thought of a few ideas like infiltrating parties/balls, framing public officials, attempting to seize populist control of a guild.
>>47387550
I'm working on a wild west campaign right now and so far I have 3 big quest ideas. The first is to send the party after a cursed train that went missing for a year then suddenly reappeared and is moving nonstop despite having no fuel or crew. The second is to have the party go to an oasis that takes them to the Feywild. They have no recollection of it so they just suddenly find themselves wearing flower crowns and having strange fey artifacts in their bags and even though they think they've only been out of town for a few hours a month has passed. This last idea I had is to send the party to investigate a gold mine that no one has been able to come back from and it turns out a beholder has taken control of the mind as their lair and is forcing the miners to collect gold for it.
>>47390272
Not overtly, maybe, but getting mad making you resist non magical weapons (read: all the weapons?) is kind of supernatural. The flavor bits make this somewhat clear as well; the barbarian isn't just mad. He's mad, but he's tapping into some sort of "primal mad", the base mad. He's like, master mad or something. I guess you could just say he's so far removed from society he's just like an animal, and that's why he gets things like Feral Instinct, or the ability to just not die. The corebook does also say "superhuman strength and resilience."
how is the material in starter set? nice stuff?
>>47390348
Maybe it's not magic but spirit or will power? Like some anime shit.
>>47390402
It's still magic.
Also, the whole "anime" thing is silly, because it happens in western comics/cartoons just as frequently or even more so.
Superman can fly, but it's somehow not magic? That's just what happens when your universe is too convoluted.
>>47390402
It's not about the flavor, it's about the mechanic. I don't think it's wrong for them to do cool shit, but having a resource that lets you just get around making a skill check is kind of lame, since you could do it through the skill check and you're just stealing the spell caster's thunder. This is what the spellcaster was designed around. The Wizard takes an opportunity cost in learning his Comprehend Languages ritual. This gives it to Fighters/Rogues/Barbarians all the time forever. It's worse in some places too, where a level after the Wizard learns haste, Fighters/Rogues/Barbarians get a once a day haste that's also better than the Wizards because they don't have to concentrate on it. Sorry Wizard!
At least, that's how I can interpret it from the PDF itself. There are also a few problems with just the pdf itself. It doesn't mention when you get the martial dice back (if at all, I'll just assume Long Rest) or if you can just use every power that pops up on that list whenever the situation arises and you feel like making your wizard wonder why he's dealing with a d6, no AC, and not a lot to contribute once his spell slots are used up.
>>47390370
Personally I enjoyed it a lot. It's a bit short but for what it is, it is done very well.
>>47390301
Except they're solo-use and largely exploration-focused. There's no teleportation or pocket planes or enchanting items or summoning zombies involved here. It's only shit covered by "what could a guy do if he were a low-powered superhero?"
Also, stop falling for the "Warlock is a shitty caster" meme. You might as well say Fighters are terrible because everyone dips into them, too.
>>47390893
They're the most constrained casters with only 2 or 3 spell slots at all for most of their life, and now the martials get it too.
Rolling a 5e wizard at level 11. First time playing wizard in 5e. Any interesting recommendations for spells? Magic items?
>>47390932
They are replenished after a short rest tho.
Also don't forget they can get level 1 spells at-will with invocations.
>>47390947
If you want to blast, I'm a fan of the spells that give you a bonus action to deal damage. Melf's Minute Meteors and Bigby's Hand are two good ones.
Bigby's Hand is a pretty good spell either way, though, since it can deal damage or act as a small controlling spell.
>>47390961
But taking those invocations is a choice. There's no choice involved here except for the couple of ones that require skill profs. Some of them are outright better than spells, too, like the one that gives Haste.
It doesn't even take into consideration the fact that some of these martial paths already get spells. EK is still better at combat than the Wizard because of base fighter features, but now he has wizard spells for utility and then better wizard spells for utility too. Sweet. Same for the Arcane Trickster. There's a cost to spells, too, that I think people don't really consider when they talk about unbalance.
>>47391016
If you purposefully build your warlock to be a shitty caster, you don't get to cry that your warlock is a shitty caster.
>>47391051
There's still some kind of cost for it. That makes it an interesting decision. One of the reasons why this pdf is bad is because it's uninteresting, imo. There's no cost to these spells, and a lot of the martial classes are already the best at what they do.
>>47391085
dude, I'm just talking about how saying "[warlocks] are the most constrained casters" makes you sound like a retard.
>>47390489
>you're just stealing the spell caster's thunder
Yeah, and casters have been stealing martial thunder and exploration thunder and social interaction thunder for-fucking-ever and are still doing it. Chin up.
>The Wizard takes an opportunity cost in learning his Comprehend Languages ritual.
You'd have more of a point if you used any class but Wizard, the one that has to worry the least about limited spell selection.
>This gives it to martials all the time forever.
Except they're spending a resource to do this and a ritual caster isn't. On top of this, Break Language Barrier only translates languages (including spoken) that are written in the same alphabet as one you know; it lets an English speaker understand Spanish and French, but not Russian or Chinese, because papa don't play with Pinyin and shit.
>Wizard learns haste, martials get once a day haste that's also better because no Concentration
It also adds a level of exhaustion, whereas the spell Haste only puts you out of combat for a single round.
>It doesn't mention when you get the martial dice back
The second paragraph in the section that describes MPP are. Short rest. The easier recharge of these effects is balanced by their higher resource usage (relative to the martial's reservoir of MPP) and/or lessened scope and power.
>>47391210
>the one who hast to worry the least about limited spell selection
learning spells requires you to find them and pay for them, anon. The fact that they recover on a short rest is even dumber, even if your "better than haste" gives you something that'll go away in a long rest.
Spellcasters are hardly better in combat than martials in this edition anyways, and it doesn't cover spellcaster/martial hybrids who just get the best of both worlds with no downsides. This homebrew is just bad.
>>47390947
Currently a level 11 sorcerer, so here are some general tips since their spell list is similar.
* Abuse the ever-living fuck out of the fact you can copy spells out of spell books and prepare a new spell list. Although I have a fairly extensive spell list as a favored soul sorcerer, I'm constantly finding situations where I wish I could swap out spells at times other than at level up.
* Always remember that spell saves are independent of spell level. It 9th and 1st level spells both have the same spell save DC.
* Don't under-estimate cantrips. Their damage scales and they don't use spell slots.. Always take at least one damage one. Ray of Frost is probably one of the better damage ones since even if the damage isn't that great, slowing opponents is often useful.
* Magic Missile is, as with most editions, a good all rounder spell. It doesn't have a save, it doesn't require an attack roll, and AFAIK nothing resists it since it's force damage.
* Mage Armor is a good one if you don't have armor proficiency from somewhere. It lasts 8 hours and does not require concentration like most buffs do. As a side note: If you DO get armor proficiency from somewhere, wearing armor doesn't hinder your spellcasting.
* Invisibility and Greater Invisibility are both useful in different ways. Invisibility lasts a LOT longer but greater invisibility doesn't break when you cast. Don't take both as your "free when you level up" spells, but if you find a book to copy it out of, sure.
* See invisibility is a strong choice. There are a couple low level but nasty monsters (like a Poltergeist) that are permanently invisible.
* Web is a great restraining spell at all levels. The damage is nice at low level but ignore-able at higher.
* Banishment is a good replacement for Hold Person/Monster when you aren't sure what type of enemies you are facing. Non-outsider enemies will come back when the duration ends, but they're still out of the fight.
>>47391016
You're thinking of Warlocks as a pure caster when they're actually martials who managed to steal a few spells. Warlock has more in common with a Martial Power Fighter/EK than it does a full-blown Wizard or Sorcerer. It's a damage-dealing class that relies on a resourceless attack (Eldritch Blast) and has a few spells thrown in for good measure.
Why you'd complain about Martial Powers ripping off the Warlock when anyone can take Magic Initiate to steal their Eldritch Blast at full scaling or dip a level or two to jack all their front-loaded shit is beyond me, but it's not like people aren't also dipping the martial classes for their front-loaded abilities like Action Surge and Expertise.
>>47391277
>Spellcasters are hardly better in combat than martials in this edition anyways
it's
not
about
combat
>>47391349
>it's not about combat
>haste is one of the first features
it still makes them stronger in the thing they already excel at while narrowing the role casters fill by giving their mechanics that they already pay for to people who probably, honestly don't need it.
>>47391411
Martial-caster disparity is not about combat.
It's been posted in this thread like ten times.
I'm taking a Help action to give you advantage on your Intelligence check to comprehend this and expending a d6 Bardic Inspiration die so you can boost your roll. Please figure it out.
>>47391411
>it still makes them stronger in the thing they already excel at
Good. The thing they excel at is pretty much irrelevant. You could honestly start a barbarian with free 20 strength and it would still be worse than any full caster.
>>47390972
>>47391288
Thanks. I'll keep all of that in mind. Should I generally avoid touch spells? I've heard that they're not worth putting yourself in melee to use.
>>47391471
I know what the supposed "Martial-caster disparity" is about. This homebrew boosts their combat potential though, regardless of whether it's trying to fix some imagined problem where martials suck. The "martial-caster" disparity is irrelevant here.
>>47391494
this is dumb. in a few systems i could imagine this holding some merit but dnd is based around combat. while there are probably combat light campaigns the game itself is still designed around combat.
>>47391504
You can deliver them through your familiar (if you have one) but most of them probably aren't worth walking into melee range for.
>>47391525
Casters are too much better in combat too, to respectfully disagree with the other anon who thinks they're only a problem outside combat. And that's without getting in to how boring martials are because people are scared of them actually Doing Things.
>>47391525
So we've found the guy who only runs or plays in combat-heavy campaigns and everyone gets a long rest between sessions. Thanks for coming out, champ, you've been swell.
>>47391592
This isn't the 3.5 general tho.
>>47391605
It's barely better than 3.5, because neckbeards shit their pants over 4e for being different and balanced and playable.
can someone explain how does the adventures work? for example I see one title "tyranny of dragons" and then there are several book with this subtitle like hoard of the dragon queen or rise of tiamat. are they follow each other?
how good is the hoard of the dragon queen?
>>47391349
It mostly is, since that's what the rules are largely in place to govern. Everything else is a little more loose, and even combat in 5e is rather open-ended.
I think the best way to illustrate this is the noble background. If you want to talk about inbalance in regards to the social theatre, the noble is by far the best background regardless of what class you choose.
>>47391626
>I have never played 5e: the post
>>47391679
Sailor is the exact same thing but for combat.
>>47391592
I just don't think this is true at all if you're building your characters right. They have bigger "spikes" but a Cone of Cold does about 30 damage on average. A GWM Fighter/Barbarian or Sharpshooter Fighter/Ranger can do more than that every turn without expending a resource and still has other things to fall back on if he needs more burst or whatever. He's also got more HP and better defensive features than a Wizard. Cone of Cold will do more damage to multiple targets but it's a 5th level spell. That's a big deal.
>>47391593
If you bring a class called "Fighter" or Barbarian into a no combat political intrigue campaign then yeah, no shit you're going to have a bad time. You're playing the class that is based around being really, really good at Fighting. Why should he be good at everything else? Why does he have to be? Maybe you're playing a character into a stupid campaign for them. You don't even need to be a caster to be totally better than them, just pick a Rogue and max Strength.
This argument is also stupid.
>>47391660
Maybe try reading them. Also Tyranny of Dragons is shit, try something else first.
>>47391711
>If you bring a class called "Fighter" or Barbarian into a no combat political intrigue campaign then yeah, no shit you're going to have a bad time.
Wizard. Sorcerer. Druid. Those scream "political intrigue" to you?
>>47391679
So you'd be fine with removing every spell whose purpose isn't to roll damage, protect against or alleviate enemy-rolled damage, impose a combat condition on enemies, or protect against enemies imposing combat conditions on allies?
Scrying, Unseen Servant, Tenser's Floating Disk, Leomund's Tiny Hut, Augury, Word of Recall, Create/Destroy Water, Rope Trick, Zone of Truth, Clairvoyance, etc., all ditched because everything should be "mostly about combat"?
>>47391711
>If you bring a class called "Fighter" or Barbarian into a no combat political intrigue campaign then yeah, no shit you're going to have a bad time.
That's not really the case anymore though. As long as you have one decent mental score, you're really good to go, and depending on what background you choose you can really play just about any class in any kind of campaign.
>>47391736
Wizards and Sorcerers were part of some historical courts, and guess what, they can be quite competent in political intrigue.
>>47391757
I'm not that guy, but: some more than others, but in general, yes. At the very least, Create/Destroy Water makes looking for actual water pointless, Zone of Truth makes being intimidating or influential pointless, Tenser's Floating Disk makes being strong even more single-purpose...
>>47391713
are the subtitles connected?
>>47391757
Are you making a point? I'm afraid I don't understand it.
It's not that everything should be about combat, it's just that looser rules work fine for governing looser ideas.
>>47391782
Is that what you think of when you read "wizard" though? If it is, fine, but to most it doesn't imply that they're going to be good at that stuff any more than "fighter" does.
>>47391810
What do you think?Are you literally retarded?
>>47391711
>he uses cone of coldness instead of Immolate on the big bad after cursing his save stat for massive amounts of fire and necrotic damage over a minute which will turn him to ashes if he dies while it burns him
>>47391711
>If you bring a class called "Fighter" or Barbarian into a no combat political intrigue campaign then yeah, no shit you're going to have a bad time.
Having read some books in the series mentioned here, which D&D was explicitly created to invoke, I see absolutely no reason why a Barbarian should not be pecs-deep in political intrigue or a Fighter should not be the guy everyone looks to for advice on matters that have nothing to do with "Fighting".
>>47391832
>to most it doesn't imply that they're going to be good at that stuff any more than "fighter" does
>to most
To the uneducated, maybe.
>>47391863
I shouldn't have to study real life wizards to understand what D&D wizards are about. D&D isn't based on real life anyway. If it was, they wouldn't get magic. You can't have it both ways.
>>47391736
Wizard definitely but I can honestly tell you that if you pick a blasting sorcerer into a "political intrigue" campaign then you're probably going to have a shitty time, and if you make a sorcerer for a "political intrigue" campaign and there's suddenly lots of combat, you're going to have just of shitty as a time since you learned a bunch of non-combat spells.
Like I said though, if you want to look at how much imbalance is in the game maybe try not cutting out 50% of the game that it was clearly designed around. Hell, it was even BASED off of a war game at first. If you take out the things that the Fighter was designed to be good at, then yes, the Fighter sucks. I'm sorry. This PDF is still stupid. I can have proficiency in deception and tell someone to kill their friend in a fight a few times a day if they fail a wisdom check. "He's being a dick, you should shoot him." "Oh, okay boss!"
>>47391777
That's good news and I'm glad to hear it. It makes this pdf even more pointless and stupid, though.
>>47391847
For a 5th level spell slot I can do less damage than a fireball cast at 3rd level for a whopping average of 21 damage to a single person with the chance to do an average of 9 damage every turn if they don't put out the fire with a Dexterity saving throw first (and also aren't resistant or immune to fire, or don't come up and whack me to disrupt my concentration on the spell). I'm not super impressed.
>>47391711
>a caster isn't as useful in combat because their limited AoE spells don't hit as hard as a Fighter's full round of single-target melee
Oh, so you're just a shitty caster player, that's why you can't see the problem. Come back to us when you have enough imagination to kill a whole cave's worth of Drow with a single spell that isn't cast anywhere near them and does no direct damage.
>>47391848
Bring in him if you want. But if the games not about war, then the fact that he's a great warrior isn't going to matter. You're signing yourself up for that.
Keep in mind, great warriors are what these classes are supposed to feel like.
>>47391922
Being a great warrior is cool and good and wonderful. It's essentially demanding that every fighter be useless at everything else that's ridiculous.
>>47391921
And the Fighter couldn't have done the same thing in his own way? By just killing the shit out of them like Brock Samson?
>>47391941
>being useless at everything else
why does he have to be? why should he be able to fly 60 feet into the air without a check from level 6?
>>47391942
Maybe the Fighter could, if the environment and time allowed. But "killing the shit out of them like Brock Samson" is absolutely the worst way to go about that because ACTION ECONOMY.
>>47391901
There's a good reason for using Bestow Curse before immolation, anon.
>>47391964
To be clear, I'm not advocating that pdf or whatever specifically, just the position that spells are a sacred thing that anything resembling is inherently wrong. I would be fine with a fighter "flying" for a turn, to a balanced extent, because that's essentially what jumping is and a D&D fighter is far beyond the capabilities of a real life person.
>>47380599
Don't play Pathfinder. It's garbage.
>>47391890
You don't have to study historical wizards to know they aren't slouches in political intrigue, you can gather that from fucking Aladdin, or a number of famous novels or films.
Or, if you want to know specifically about the DnD iteration of the Wizard, you could read this obscure piece of work called theFUCKING DND PLAYER'S HANDBOOK. It literally has everything you need to know.
>>47391964
>why does he have to be?
You're the one telling us he should be. If the Fighter exists only to do shit in combat, and all of his out-of-combat utility is governed by skill and ability checks that are equally accessible to casters, how can he ever outperform them out of combat? By simply having higher stats than them at all times? What stops a caster from getting equally high stats? Is having +2 or 3 in a handful of skills better than being able to cast spells which replicate those effects by other means?
>>47380835
>Does the community mind/tolerate text only?
There's lots of text-only games on Roll20.I've run three text-only campaigns in the span of three years on that site.
Roll20 is a mixed bag, and filled with autists and children, though, so expect to put in some work to actually find a good group.
>>47392018
Are you sure about that anon
You should go re-read those spells. Specifically, the "Duration" parts.
>>47392027
I agree! I would totally let a Fighter or a Barbarian make an athletics check to jump beyond what their normal vertical distance is to do some cool shit if they asked me to. I just wouldn't give them "You're also an eagle totem barbarian now" for free just for playing a martial.
>>47392048
>You're the one telling us he should be
I don't think he needs any help, and the entire reason this pdf keeps coming back is because people think Fighters suck for some reason and that casters are gods or whatever.
>that are equally accessible to casters
they'll be okay at it if they focus on it, but in a political intrigue campaign your fighter might not need strength or dex but your wizard still definitely needs intelligence. In a weird way you've basically just freed the stat constraints of the Fighter.
Not to mention Fighters, Rogues, and Barbarians can pick up out of combat utility with the Eldritch Knight, Thief, Arcane Trickster, Totem Warrior, and Champion archtypes, or through feats like Ritual Casting if they so chose. There's this stupid idea that fighters can't do anything outside of combat and this is apparently what this PDF is supposed to address. Either way, a lot of their budget is focused on in combat utility because DND was designed with combat in mind and was therefore balanced around campaigns that feature combat in some regard.
>>47391921
Muh white room wizard.
How has "imagination" continued this shit over from 3.pf?
>>47392133
>your wizard still definitely needs intelligence
Does he? You can get away with a lot without ever casting a spell that allows for saves. You don't need X Intelligence to be able to cast spells of Y level anymore as in 3rd Edition. You're not adding your Intelligence to damage unless you're an Evoker, but this isn't a combat campaign, so why bother?
All your Intelligence modifier necessarily does as a Wizard is grant you 1-5 additional spells memorized. But since you're not worried about combat spells or things with saves...
>>47390348
Adrenaline can do some pretty freaky shit, including letting people lift things far heavier than they would normally be able to, and to keep going with wounds that would normally be fatal. The barbarian goes a little beyond pure realism, sure, but it's squarely in "cinematic realism" territory, not magic.
>>47392220
Sure. I think the flavor is open to interpretation, but even a non-Spirit Totem barbarian could be seen as having a power from a supernatural origin.
>>47392133
>if you want to be useful out of combat, take these archetypes and only these archetypes
>two that are explicitly magical and make you a caster
>one that is ostensibly magical
>and two whose utility is limited to "jump and/or climb slightly better"
>>47392276
If you want to be useful out of combat maybe you should be creative.
>>47392266
"Could be seen", sure, but the discusion at hand is whether or not a Barbarian fits in a non-magic setting, and whether or not a Barbarian's rage is inherently supernatural.
My Fighter's skill with weapons could be seen to have a supernatural origin if I wanted them to. The question isn't whether they can be seen to be supernatural, but if they must be seen to be supernatural.
And the answer, for both the Barbarian and the Fighter, is "no".
>>47392276
>Champion Remarkable Athlete and Thief Second-Story Work
>when you make a running jump, the distance you can cover increases by a number of feet equal to your Strength (Dex for Thief) modifier
A whole five feet.Does this even do anything for Champions?
A running jump requires you to move 10 feet first. You can then leap a number of feet equal to your Strength score, and each foot you clear on the jump costs a foot of movement. For the Champion, this is obviously 20, but boom, he's now hit his limit of 30 movement. You have to take the Dash action to make use of this unless you interpret Remarkable Athlete as just giving you bonus movement speed.
>>47392333
>whether or not a Barbarian's rage is inherently supernatural
PHB says it's superhuman.
>>47392333
Let me just clarify that I wasn't disagreeing with you. Just saying I think it could be. If the DM was being a dick I could see someone saying "no barbarians".
Truth be told though, I think not allowing casters is kind of a dick move anyways. Magic is fun. It's one of those things you can't do in real life at all. Why would I wanna take that away from the players? What if someone really wanted to play a caster?
I don't think it's always a dick move since it seems like all these people know and are okay with it (maybe even wanted it), and the guy probably isn't really a dick, but on a personal level I guess I might be kinda bummed.
>>47392322
>you want class abilities that are useful out of combat? Try to be a jumplomancer with a straight face!
>>47392375
Superhuman and supernatural in D&D have always been two different things. See Extraordinary Actions back in 3.5 or the Martial power source of 4E.
>>47392322
>do something creative out of combat as a martial
>nothing stops a caster from doing the same thing
Is it beginning to sink in for you?
>>47392387
>>47392436
If you don't build your character to have skills or other things you can do out of combat in a campaign that has no combat, then that's your fault or your DM's for not telling you ahead of time.
Either way, if you're playing a campaign that has no combat than I'm sure the game will become unbalanced. Combat is what the game was literally founded on, and it's a core mechanic and part of the intended gameplay. To that end, some of the classes, who were designed to represent great warriors or berserkers, were designed to be good in combat but have relatively less out of combat utility skills. If you remove the entire part of the game they were designed around, I agree, they'll probably feel kind of empty, but even then I imagine you could squeeze out some use out of your limited abilities without resorting to this trash DMs guild PDF. There's probably a better system to emulate this gameplay with; go find one of them and play that.
>>47392459
>If you don't build your character to have skills or other things you can do out of combat in a campaign that has no combat,
Okay, I've built my character to have skills and other things I can do out of combat.
But the caster can also do all of those things. And since he's got magic, he can do several of them better.
>>47391711
But isn't "political intrigue" just code for a shitty campaign? It doesn't matter if you kick the dog shit to the right or to the left; it's still dog shit.
>>47391593
>tfw my current group is combat heavy, and it's almost a long rest between each session
>the DM has literally never let us short rest, instead saying "you have enough time for a long rest" straight out
>TFW our DM has such fucking little idea of how rules should be balanced/loot should be handed out we killed a fucking balor at 10th level with relatively minor trouble
>a balor
>at full health
>with -MORE- AC because he also has no fucking idea that AC is what it is for a reason.
>>47392490
He'll never be able to fight as well as you though. It just doesn't matter, because you're never going to do any fighting. Bummer. That's not the fault of the system, necessarily. If you ever got to Fight, it might not matter as much. You'd have your moments where you were important and you really shined, and you'd still feel like a Fighter. If you never fight, then being good at fighting doesn't matter. You should probably find a different system.
>TFW I start Out of the Abyss tonight
>With a group of literal retards
>I don't want to do this
>I just want to run ROLEPLAYING games
Someone kill me.
>>47392544
>he'll never be able to fight physically in melee* as well as you
>>47385638
>>47387850
>>47387868
>he's got such a recognizable writing style
I'll never tire of plebians with two-digit IQs getting massively butthurt that and obsessed with me because I'm a smart motherfucker. The only people who complain when someone proposes a build that isn't "im a fighter, i use a greatsword and i take the great-weapon master feat" or "i am wizard. i cast fireball and find familiar" are people who are too intellectually bankrupt to optimize a build or think outside of the box. Literally, the one of you fags who has been rubbing himself off over my posts for weeks has not come out on top of any of the arguments he's incited. It's always a nice diversion to school a dumb motherfucker though, so keep it coming; I love the attention. Feed me your (You)'s, bitches.
Have an original epic filename meme to keep my post on-topic. Pic related.
>>47392276
>>47392544
The worst part about this post too is that if you just want refluffed spells and supernatural abilities you literally have an avenue to them by just taking the EK or Arcane Trickster and changing the flavor on it. There you go.
>>47392574
Or at a range if you focus on Dex and use bows, but if you focus on melee then yeah he'll probably be a lil better off at ranged than you.
>>47392502
>But isn't "political intrigue" just code for a shitty campaign?
In a system with competent social mechanics? No.
In DnD? Yes.
>>47392357
If he doesn't Dash but still wants to jump the full 25ft, he ends his turn in mid-air.
>>47392611
The operative word there is "physically", and even then, high level casters have means to get around that (not that casters like Clerics or Paladins are particular slouches in melee to begin with).
If your barometer for "good at combat" is "kills the enemies quickly", casters can still beat your Fighter.
>>47392635
Every other effect like that involves you falling if your turn ends and you're still off the ground.
>>47392649
>kills the enemies quickly
Fighters and their ilk definitely kill single targets quickest, and their strong conditional damage and higher defenses mean they're better at staying in the fight too.
>>47392673
They're also pretty explicit about that. Maybe it's just up to DM Fiat.
>>47392673
Mind giving me an example? I'd let him finish his jump at the beginning of his next turn. Also if he made a successful Athletics check he could reach even farther.
Rolls or point-buy?
>>47392133
Just cast bestow curse with fifth or higher.
It's worth it to fuck over someone all combat without concentration
>>47392631
>opinion discarded
Thanks for playing. Please insert four (4) quarters if you would like to continue.
>>47392839
Yes.
>>47392574
there's only a few casters that I would say that have the same combat potential as martials and I think they don't especially have much out of combat utility
>>47392839
Point buy.
>>47392864
Sounds like you need to be more creative. What, the only caster with utility is the fucking Wizard?
>>47392844
Bestow Curse is bonkers good for a single target spell, but it's a concentration spell.
>>47392839
Rolls if your group is only in it for the story/roleplay aspect.
Point-buy if your players enjoy optimizing their builds and want to adventure vicariously through their character.
>>47392902
obviously they have more utility than a fighter or something, but I would say that wizards are the only ones with an extremely huge amount of it
>>47392937
Excuse me, I'm an idiot and didn't read the fine print.
that just makes it crazy good.
>>47392937
Not when cast at fifth or higher.
Its only concentration below that, anon.
>>47392560
I'm stuck in that exact postion right now, anon.
I've been in OotA for like 2 months now.
Leave the group.
Leave while you still can.
>>47392937
Beyond fifth level, bestow curse doesn't require concentration, as >>47392844 mentions.
Can you level 9 spellslot Bestow Curse (permanent duration) the same target multiple times, to do different curses/curse different stats/etc?
>>47392984
>Leave the group.
I want to drop these assholes like a sack of potatoes. But if I do, I have no content to replace it with, and the huge amounts of work I put into bringing in an audience goes to waste.
If only this were just a "pick some randoms from Roll20 and hope it works out" thing.
>>47392844
that's 2 5th level slots for damage that's only good if you get close to the full duration out of it. Cone of Cold will do slightly less single target damage but deals more in an AOE and it doesn't rely on Bestow Curse for it's usefulness.
It's also worth mentioning that if by "necrotic damage" you meant the 1d8 extra, you can't hurt their dex save and do the necrotic damage with one bestow curse. At this point you're using most of your high level slots for one combo. Maybe that's worth it for a single enemy, but I think the AOE is better since it covers a different niche than what the other martials already excel at. either way, 7d6+1d8 is like 25 damage. A fighter can make that in one attack. You'll be getting 2d6+2d8+whatever other damage you can manage out of it assuming they fail their dex save every turn, but I think the Fighter starts ahead, and he'll stay ahead or maybe fall slightly behind as the rounds go on but he hasn't spent all of his high level resources to do this either.
>>47393022
Multiple instances of the same game effect (including spells) never stack, only the most powerful one applies.
So no.
>>47393049
Bestow Curse has five different effects to choose from, though.
A "disadvantage with saves and checks made with one ability score" Bestow Curse is different from a "Wis save each turn or do nothing" Bestow Curse, except for them both, y'know, being Bestow Curse.
>>47393049
That's a retarded ruling. If I cuse myself with a level 9 slot with disadvantage to attack myself, I'm always under the effect of the Curse spell, and thus nobody else can ever curse me.
>>47393080
Still the same spell. I might think it could be stacked from multiple sources but definitely not the same person.
>>47391921
What the fuck spell are you referring to? There is no spell that is even close to that powerful and long range, outside of meteor swarm. If you had said undead or fiends then forbidance would also work.
>>47393127
>thinking in terms of actually engulfing enemies in an area of effect and dealing direct damage
>>47393080
>>47393111
I'm not making a ruling, just saying what it is RAW. Bestow Curse is an edge case that a DM could easily say stacks with different effects (and probably should, in the case of that exploit), but by default it doesn't stack even with different effects.
How do I convince someone to make a character that's not entirely defined by one shitty joke? I'm trying to get a group together and one of my friends just wants to play joke shit. So far his character ideas have included a druid who can't figure out how to turn back to normal and is stuck as a bear, a permanently invisible gnome who runs around naked and a flamboyantly gay drow designed to make fun of one of our other players who's a gay black guy. He also refuses to read the players handbook. I'd tell him to fuck off but then the party would only have 2 members because I can't find anyone else to play.
>>47393178
There's nothing wrong with two player parties and you could always give your players two characters each. Someone like that fuckstick is going to ruin the game no matter what concept he runs with.
>>47392839
Point buy. Always.
>>47393178
Tell him to fuck off and run for a two-man party. It's not optimal but it's better than someone being actively antagonistic to the game and other players.
>>47393178
have you tried talking to him
>>47393160
Ok, then enlighten me on what single spell can kill a horde of enemies in an instant from far away. I've played sorcerers, wizards, and warlocks and none of them have a spell that can do this. I have yet to get a good chance to play a cleric or bard.
>>47393233
Yeah I asked him why he had to come up with these shitty ideas and if he could at least pretend to take it seriously and he said he just wanted to have fun with it.
>>47393271
Maybe he's here for a different reason than your group.
Maybe you could try to get him to tone it down, at the very least.
>>47380705
Pretty bad experience for me. I applied to play a level 1 adventure of a campaign i had played previously and had a lot of experience but the only reason the DM didnt let me join was because i didnt say the childish special word that the application told us to say.
So in my opinion roll 20 is a waste of internet domain.
>>47393288
Everyone else is making serious characters. I'd be fine with a more light hearted comic relief character but all his ideas are 1 dimensional jokes. Everyone else has been able to tell me their characters background, motivation, etc on some level but all he comes up with are these basic gimmicky premises with nothing else to define the character.
>>47393338
You got rejected because you couldn't fucking read?
If only more 5e DMs were that way.
>>47393345
That's what I mean when I say you might be able to get him to tone it down. There's a chance it's hopeless though, and if you come to this conclusion I'd either get someone new into it or deal with 2 players. Either way, if you want to keep this player (maybe he's not so bad outside of his shitty characters, after all) my honest advice is to just try and talk to him. Maybe a "please play a more serious character, I don't mind if you're comic relief after all but just keep it within reason, like something so extreme".
Maybe make him a cocky gnome barbarian since he seems to be fond of this stuff, or a bard of some kind.
>>47393365
No i got rejected because i didnt take saying the childish word seriously.
Please refrain from being autistic.
>>47393438
What was the special word?
Rolled 2, 2, 2, 4, 3, 1, 6, 2, 2, 1, 6, 1, 2, 3, 6, 3 = 46 (16d6)
>buy a vial of alchemist's fire
>apply it to your weapon
>soft-permanent +1d4 fire damage buff for only 50gp
>level 20 GWM fighter
>20 str
>buff a greatsword with alchemist's fire
>buy oil flasks, have the rogue cover the bad guy in oil
>take the attack action
attack with GWM greatsword 4x
>action surge
>take the attack action
attack with GWM greatsword 4x
Enjoy your 16d6+8d4+160 damage in the first round of combat.
That's a damage potential maximum of 288, a damage potential mean of 216, and a damage potential minimum of 184.
>>47393503
Fuck let me try to remember. Its been a few years since it happened. I think it was huckleberry or something stupid like that
>>47393593
It was a check to make sure you can actually read the entirety of something, and you failed.
>>47393587
Your damage potential minimum is_0_, actually.
>>47393587
>soft-permanent +1d4 fire damage buff for only 50gp
Your sword takes 1d4 fire damage each round until it is destroyed.
>>47393587
If your DM allows this, good for them.
Personally, I would not allow it in my game but that's because I don't think alchemist fire would work that way.
>>47393652
Swords don't have HP.
>>47393652
Very good point.
>>47393669
DMG pg 246-247. Objects have HP.
>>47389777
>That's why my group has started using d12+d8 for ability checks and attack rolls. It makes you actually stop and think "hmm, I have a reasonable chance of succeeding on this?"
As opposed to D20 which lets you know whether you have a decent chance of succeeding on something without requiring you to stop and think. There's no advantage to be gained by switching to a more obtuse, less discrete system like d8+d12.
>>47393646
I read it obviously. It was just a dumb amd lazy way to filter your unwanted players.
>>47393782
>It was just a dumb amd lazy way to filter your unwanted players.
And yet, it clearly worked.
>>47393669
Technically all things have HP and AC. Check out >>47393696
>>47393696
I guess that none of your players weapons, armor, or shields last more than a couple combats then. By the end of a dragon fight, half his hoard will be destroyed and all the players' belongings will be destroyed.
>>47389962
Flying is not the same as jumping. Flying lets you change directions in mid-air. Though it can pass as jumping as long as you don't do anything fancy.
>>47393818
A dragon's attacks and breath weapon only target creatures, not objects, so it's fine.
>>47393782
It filtered out an experienced and mature player.
It sure worked like a charm bud.
>>47393818
>DM wants a DC 24 Strength check to bash a door down
>could destroy it in one attack
THIS
IS
BULLSHIT
>>47393818
The only time gear takes damage is if it is left unattended and he's hit by a fireball or similar effect, or if you intentionally try to deal damage to the gear. That's my assumption at least from how most spells talk about not burning or destroying worn or carried objects.
>>47393854
It filtered out someone who couldn't follow directions, even if that sacrifices the best roleplayer I've ever met, worth
>>47393854
Oh god, please show us your application.
>>47393411
Yeah I just talked to him and tried to convince him to make a character who's not a one-off joke, and to read the fucking Player's Handbook, and he said no and told me to stop taking a game so seriously. I think I'm just gonna roll with 2 players if I can't find a competent replacement.
>>47393873
It depends on the nature of the door
>>47393922
Whatever dude it was dumb and i was going to stoop to their level and play their games. Probably best i didnt play with them anyway i would of most likely left.
>>47393955
Dont have it anymore sorry i cant amuse you further.
>>47393587
>Ignites when exposed to air
>Apply to weapon
You literally capped the relevant words, yet you didn't read them? Also it was specified in Sage Advice I think that oil doesn't stack, once you're doused doing it again doesn't do anything.
>>47393955
Pick your poison.
>>47393873
Let's see you deal that much damage without any weapons.
>>47393990
>could a Fighter cut through a stone wall
Stone walls have 15 HP per inch of thickness.
>>47393896
>>47393848
>>47393812
>>47393696
>>47393669
If a DM destroys a greatsword that's being subjected to 1d4 fire damage a turn, then my fighter is going to use his extra attack feature to destroy the big bad enemies' weapons and armor in the first round of combat every time.
>>47394023
That would take my Fighter two rounds, or one if I spend a superiority die.
>>47394028
Not everything is handled like combat. This is why chase scenes with certain GMs are horrible.
>>47394054
Depending on exactly how strong alchemist fire is, it could melt your weapon, but of course then every time you use it as intended, AKA not blowing it up in your face when you open it to pour on your weapon, the enemy's armor/weapon would also be subject to that.
>>47394157
If martials could beat their way through walls with hammers and fists, that'd be one step closer to not being put out in the rain by casters.
>>47394057
That's hardly one attack though.
>>47394207
I'd totally allow a 20 str character to punch through a wall, but a lot of GMs are sadly stuck with the impression that martial characters are normal people, or close to it.
>>47394212
>HP deduction isn't cumulative
Well, pretty much anyone with Great Weapon Master+Fighting if you want a single blow.
>>47394028
>>47393873
My fighter (>>47393587) can do it.
>>47394000
I'll forgive because trips but
>Sage Advice says so
>doesn't provide source
As written, when a creature is soaked in oil, it takes an extra 5 fire damage every time it is exposed to fire. Unless you interpreted it as stacking multiple oils for more damage.
>>47391922
>then the fact that he's a great warrior isn't going to matter
Are you literally retarded? Great warriors have tons of political clout. Hero of the people? High ranking general? Leader of the resistance that got the current establishment into power? Militaristic dictator? There's literally dozens of ways that a fighter could contribute in a political campaign.
>GM throws a Beholder at us as a level 5 encounter
>"Sorry guys I forgot to check the CR"
>Refuses to retcon fight
>months of game wasted
>>47394319
Leave this shit DM immediately.
>>47394313
No one worships great warriors.
This distinguished-looking wizard, on the other hand,
>>47392357
Doesn't one of these work for high jumps too?
>>47392517
>players knowing the AC of monsters
Your DM must be actually retarded
>>47394313
>>47394367
That shit can just be back story. If there's no combat, there's nothing to show that he's a great warrior and there's no way for him to use his great warriorisms in the game in any meaningful way. It's just back story at that point, the same as "my wizard is a great sage".
>>47394384
Second Story Work does not specify running LONG jump, just "running jump" (but also not running high jump). They climb at speed, too.
>>47394410
We actually didn't, but it's hard to not figure out that he raised it when I rolled a 12 with a +9 bonus and didn't hit, and it took like a 15 or something from someone else with the same bonus to do so.
>>47392490
>And since he's got magic, he can do several of them better.
>I have magic, so I'm better.
Maybe you could be more specific. Isn't it mostly your few high level spells that let you do things without the need for skills or DCs? And isn't it mostly using these to influence combat that's actually the problem?
>>47392839
I do rolls personally. In D&D it's one of the few ways to get a unique character and add some personality.
For instance, one of my players has a druid and rolled a 3 for his charisma. No one would ever choose to do that, but it's made the character unique, and fits in with his backstory.
I also find that it makes players get attached to their character a bit more. I call it the "Animal Crossing Effect". When you give players something that's THEIRS, and unique to them, then they automatically want to protect it.
[spoilers]I do 4d6 drop, and let players choose where to put stats, because rolling in order can be kinda dumb[/spoilers]
>>47393721
My players all enjoy it, because it makes their ability scores matter more. So the rogue for instance is significantly better than the druid at stealth and such, while the druid is much more perceptive. Each person really gets to be THE specialist at what they do.
Any guides for social campaigns? I want talking, sneaking, disguising, roleplay, intrigue and lolis.
>>47394298
>I'll forgive because trips but
>>Sage Advice says so
>>doesn't provide source
>As written, when a creature is soaked in oil, it takes an extra 5 fire damage every time it is exposed to fire. Unless you interpreted it as stacking multiple oils for more damage.
Hey I just said that as an add-on. My main point is that alchemist fire cannot be used to coat a weapon, so both of the examples are faulty. The last one can still be done with a fire bolt or by just throwing the vial at them, and I can't find the sage advice ruling (not sure it has even been covered there, I remember it being pointed out in the past, probably just the consensus that it wasn't RAI and no sane GM would allow it). Also, yes, I did think it was by stacking oils, not doing several attacks; this means of course that dealing fire damage in another way would severely impact how imbalanced it is, attacking with a torch would probably be best but you wouldn't get prof to attack roll and so on, I won't bother doing the maths but it's nowhere near as good as the original example.
>>47394500
Some of the best utility spells are low level.
Disguise/Alter Self, Silent/Major Image, Unseen Servent, Tenser's Floating Disk, Detect Thoughts, Continual Flame, Enlarge/Reduce, Knock, Levitate, Minor Illusion, Message, Gust of Wind, Phantasmal Force, Suggestion, Spider Climb, Web, Shatter, Clairvoyance, Detect/Dispel Magic, Feign Death, Fly, Glyph of Warding, Leomund's Tiny Hut, Rope Trick, Phantom Steed, Sending, Sleet Storm, Grease, Tongues, Water Breathing, and Comprehend Languages are all level 3 or lower.
>>47377126
Red Hand of Doom.
White Plume Mountain, maybe?
Expedition to the Barrier Peaks
>>47394690
Don't forget Thaumaturgy and Prestidigitation, making sounds, manipulating flame, opening/closing doors, and other small stuff can be quite convenient. And Invisibility/Greater Invis are both very good for espionage and such.
>>47394298
>As written, when a creature is soaked in oil, it takes an extra 5 fire damage every time it is exposed to fire
>extra 5 fire damage every time it is exposed to fire
>every time it is exposed to fire
That's not what's written. What's written is it takes 5 extra fire damage if it's exposed to fire. It happens once.
>>47394319
He didn't forget
>>47394899
It doesn't specify that the oil is nullified after burning once, only that it is nullified after being exposed for a minute. Just because you don't like the way something is written does not mean that you can change the meaning of the words to befit your preference.
>>47394977
I'm not in the mood to give you an English lesson. It doesn't say every time. It says If. This is enough to get the point across.
>>47395276
You are in no position to give me an English lesson, you dumb nigger. The "if" condition is met every time the target is exposed to fire.
>>47395369
So the sword is destroyed by fire. You argue with RAW, argue against RAW as well. No reasonable GM would enforce/allow either. And alchemist fire still can't be applied to weapons.
>>47395432
Well I guess that torches simply burn away immediately after lighting then? And where in the description of Alchemist's Fire does it specify that it can't be used on a weapon?
>>47395508
>>47393587
>This sticky, adhesive fluid ignites when exposed to air.
By RAW the only thing it can be used for is throwing a vial. A torch being destroyed upon lighting could be argued by RAW I guess, but there's no provokation. I'm just saying, if you want to argue something imbalanced and ridiculous, be ready to have counter-arguments be just as ridiculous. No GM would rule that a flaming weapon gets destroyed, same with torches, but if you abuse it they can very well use RAW against you.
>right before the first session, one of my new players brags that he's read the monster manual cover-to-cover three times since he first started playing 5E and has memorized most of the stats of the monsters, so he'll "know" if I "cheat"
>>47395640
Randomise monster stats, and tell him the book is just examples.
>>47395576
Fair enough. If the DM says that although it all works out, it horribly imbalances the game, then I'd say fine, if he says so. But I'll be damned if I didn't want to pull it off with a different DM if possible.
>>47395640
That's a moment where you probably need to talk to the player and explain really just how much control you have, and that fudging stats is the least of your abilities.
But, after pulling him behind the curtain, be sure to explain that the purpose of the game isn't to defeat the DM, but to have fun, and that the DM is on their side.
>>47395640
These types of players are great though, because the GM is entitled to "cheat". Describe a succubus or whatever, use its stats, but then change up resistances or damage type, or how a feature works so that he will play worse than anyone else since he thinks he knows how it works. You don't even have to go as far as to target him, I've never had a planned encounter with the exact stats from the MM and it's easy to change minor things, or just refluff. If he gets upset, tough shit, sounds like you wouldn't be mad if he left.
>>47395680
I'd allow it once and if it was as broken in practice I'd ban it since. Consider that you need a thief ally within 5 ft. of him, you need a magical fire sword or use a torch/alchemist fire, and even then action surge is once per short rest and you won't have more than 3 attacks until the very end of a campaign, probably only 2. If you prepare well I wouldn't be too concerned with allowing, I think, 24 (1+5 x 4, torch) fire damage, once per short rest and without prof bonus to attack rolls, at level 5.
Actually, the +160 from the original would be half from GWM (40 from STR mod, 40 from fire), so even then assuming you have a magic sword that does fire damage, it's 40 damage from the rogue putting oil on them, a bonus to damage being much worse since you're using GWM.
>>47392839
>being retarded and letting your sword take fire damage
>not covering your fists with it
casual
>>47396938
>Rolls or point-buy?
>"not covering your fists with fire"
wat
>>47394690
Basically all of the best spells are 3rd level or lower. Higher-level spells tend to just be "kinda better but not really worth the bigger spell slot" versions of lower-level spells, or just kind of dickish.
>>47396976
>fuck that isn't the alchemists fire picture
>its a picture with literal fire in it instead
uhh... yeah i spend all my point buy points on alchemists fire
thats my stats all around
we totally play homebrew and play as inanimate objects
i didn't fuck up the link
but say i did theoretically fuck up, i meant >>47393587
So would it be too gamechanging to make short rest recharge features per encounter? I've never had the recommended 6 combat encounters per day, usually it's around 2-3, so considering that it doesn't seem like it would have too much of an effect. I'm not a huge fan of short rests slowing the game down so, and it's a bit weird to just sit down and chill for an hour even between big combats.
>>47397796
I made short rests 15 minutes, so I guess this is the case in a way
Nothing particularly broken IMHO
>>47397796
Gives warlock and monk a hell of a bump if the party wasn't already resting between every rest.
>>47398191
>wasn't already resting between every rest.
Between every encounter**. On that note, good night.
>>47384486
I'm going to hazard a guess that your combat scenarios are something like, a few guys in a room without anything else to take into consideration. And so every encounter is going to be the party rushing forward and engaging their targets until dead. This can get tedious, as you are aware. Some things you can try out:
A room with stairs going up to aware walkway. Melee guys on the ground, and archers up top. You can give the archers pillars to hide behind. Now some of the party is dealing with guys on the ground, and some are dealing with archers.
A room with a passage that leads behind/next to the party. Bad guys cam come from behind and get at any ranged/caster players.
A big guy with several small minions. The party has to pick a priority target.
A group of bad guys with a caster that buffs the bad guys. Clear priority on caster, but have to get to him.
Enemies that retreat/hide, so the combat is broken up into fighting/chasing. Make progress through the level while fighting.
Have environmental elements to encourage other approaches besides rolling to attack. Things like cliffs to grapple/throw guys, obvious hazards the players can employ like barrels of oil, big curtains to drop on enemies, etc etc
Fights in limited space, so getting into position is key. Tell your players clearly that the fighter in the lead will give the party ranger disadvantage on his shots, and then clearly tell them there's rules for moving through enemy squares, etc. If you're lucky, you'll only have to remind them they exist once, and in the future they will try to utilize these rules on their own.
>>47397796
>and it's a bit weird to just sit down and chill for an hour even between big combat
you know you dont have to rest in real time
and mechanically most of the sort rest is the extra things like eating and fucking with spells, not first aid or hitdice use
just do like >>47398189, say its 15 minutes, maybe limit how many they use if they try to abuse it, if you actually have eating and stuff, keep that one an hour or whatever
>>47397796
A big part of my campaigns is dungeon exploration, and time management, so I keep the short rests at an hour so that there's some opportunity cost, but if you're running a typical campaign then there shouldn't be anything wrong with it.Matt Mercer does the same thing as you're proposing
>>47398308
I know, I just mean that after a combat, because hp is abstract and I don't feel like my character is really tired after combat we just keep on going. I have them as 15 minutes since I saw Critical Role but was thinking if this could be usable, I think it fits 5e well in being less simulationist and simpler. 1 hour makes more sense if we play it out as healing up, preparing more spells, etc., but we generally just chill out without doing anything and then magically those abilities are back. Maybe it's a GM description thing. Thanks though, just gonna do this, if there are max 3 encounters/day then it would be hard to abuse short rests even if they take no time.
>>47398355
>>47398404
Mercer is a great DM, if only the others actually read the book and their characters' abilities.. sometimes I cringe so hard when they can't remember basic stuff like hit and damage modifiers
New old thread
>>47376541
