|
Ok yeah that changes things up quite a bit. Thanks for the rundown! We were used to having one spell dedicated to one slot, one cast per rest, so that makes things a lot more flexible.
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 21:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 23:28 |
|
|
Also, most of the classes that have to prepare spells get to pick from their entire class's spell list, while Wizards have to pick from the spells they know (the 6 they start with, the 2 they get each level, and any extras they pick up along the way).
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 21:58
|
|
|
Woah, poo poo dude that's a gamechanger.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
While I hate the idea of Caster Supremacy, I like how they changed spellcasting in 5e. 3.5, at least, you had to specifically prepare spells for each slot. You had very little flexibility, mostly in the form of Druids/Clerics being able to cast certain levels of Cure Wounds without having to prepare them. Now you can just choose the ones that are most useful and cast when you need. Vancian is still bad.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 22:11
|
|
|
tweet my meat posted:Woah, poo poo dude that's a gamechanger. And some casting classes don't prepare at all...let us know which ones you've got and we'll make sure you're doing it right.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
What are the rules on throwing weapons without the thrown tag? The last DM let our paladin throw his swords and basically just made a melee roll for it, so the paladin could pretty much kill anything at any range. They never realized that thrown is a property that some weapons, a notable exception being the swords that the pally was chucking, have a thrown tag allowing them to be used at range. Is it just a straight up "you can't throw that weapon" or is it some sort of penalty to throwing attacks?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
It works as an improvised weapon.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 22:24
|
|
|
I feel like some people in this thread are giving Warlock more credit than it is due. And this from someone who plays quite a bit of Warlocks, to the point some people think that all my characters are Warlocks, or will become Warlocks. Yes they are pretty good at spamming a single at will, that does comparable damage to an archer fighter, and gets the same number of attacks, though a little sooner than the fighter. Of course the Fighter can pull ahead fairly easily if they get a good magic weapon, or with certain class features and feats. Yes the Warlock could use Hex to get a little boost but not as much as the Fighter can pick up. For the most part Warlocks are pretty terrible at utility, in this edition. Yes they get short rest recharge spell slots, not many though and it is extremely dependant on how often they can manage to get a short rest. In my experience you are EXTREMELY lucky to get a single short rest in a day and thus the Warlock gets significantly less spells per day then other spellcasters. Also depending on the spell level the other spellcasters may be able to spam the utility spell more often. The exceptions that make the Warlock rather different than the other options are the at will that gives Major Image at will, or the Chain pact getting an Imp aka a shapechanging invisible at will poison attack more than 1 hp spell resistance badass familiar. This Warlock does have a few good or interesting Invocations but man is it inferior to the options of the 3.5 Warlock. One of the most likely classes in 3.5 to get at will Flight does not get it in 5e, while other classes that did not get at will Flight in 3.5 can get it now in 5e. Then there are the Invocations that give a spell 1 day, using a spellslot even, which are just terrible. The melee Warlock build was pretty terrible for the most part, the new pact helps but doesn't help enough in regards to defense. It also had some ability conflicts like the main ability requiring one handed weapons and the invocation for the archetype and pact giving a two handed weapon. This was helped a bit in the follow up UA that came out, except that didn't include one of the better parts of that invocation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 22:25
|
|
|
tweet my meat posted:What are the rules on throwing weapons without the thrown tag? The last DM let our paladin throw his swords and basically just made a melee roll for it, so the paladin could pretty much kill anything at any range. They never realized that thrown is a property that some weapons, a notable exception being the swords that the pally was chucking, have a thrown tag allowing them to be used at range. PHB p. 148 posted:If a character uses a ranged weapon to make a melee attack, or throws a melee weapon that does not have the thrown property, it also deals 1d4 damage. An improvised thrown weapon has a normal range of 20 feet and a long range of 60 feet.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 22:26
|
|
|
Ah, I was looking under the thrown tag and didn't notice the bit in improvised weapons about that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 22:31
|
|
|
Ryuujin posted:I feel like some people in this thread are giving Warlock more credit than it is due. And this from someone who plays quite a bit of Warlocks, to the point some people think that all my characters are Warlocks, or will become Warlocks. If you get two short rests a day you're fine. If your DM isn't giving you that then the campaign is just badly paced or going for something completely different from what the game is tentatively balanced around. Ditto if he's giving peeps good magic weapons but no rod of the pact keeper for poor warlock. Quarterstaff hexblade is a beast. Curse Bringer was meant as an alternative build path for Hexblade, not a synergistic no-brainer.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 22:35
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:If you get two short rests a day you're fine. It seems like this is rarely followed, which is why every party should have at least two of [Fighter/Monk/Warlock] so they can stick together in demanding short rests from the rest of the party. Speaking as someone who's playing one of each 
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 00:07
|
|
|
Using an explicit structure of 2-4 repetitions of "2 fights, get your short rest refresh" then "big fight, get your long rest refresh" pretty much fixed the ability refresh problems both of my online 5e groups were having. One DM takes pains to work this into something that they feel fits a narrative, and the other doesn't care and just tells you to refresh after 2 fights. I don't really notice the difference during play.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 00:48
|
|
|
Hybrid warlocks are cool when you see stuff like a Barbarian/Warlock who casts Armor of Agathys on themselves, rages, locks himself and the end boss in a cube of force and the entire table gets to sit back and laugh.
Philthy fucked around with this message at 00:54 on Sep 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 00:49
|
|
VROOM VROOM posted:It seems like this is rarely followed, which is why every party should have at least two of [Fighter/Monk/Warlock] so they can stick together in demanding short rests from the rest of the party. Speaking as someone who's playing one of each Man, that just reminds me of how dumb it is that caster supremacy is supposedly "balanced" by having to rest to recover spells. Like the party's gonna go on without the wizard at full strength. They're gonna walk 6 floors back up that dungeon to find a spot for a full rest.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 00:53
|
|
|
Nah, they'll call the Wizard dumb and let them cast cantrips.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 00:55
|
|
|
Ambush them on the way back! This isn't the first group of adventurers the baddie has had to deal with.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 00:56
|
|
|
tweet my meat posted:Can someone give me a really basic rundown of what prepared spells are and how exactly spell slots work? I think we have the general idea and it works well enough, but I'm pretty sure we're doing something wrong because we have never once mentioned prepared spells. Divide spells into two categories: what you Know, and what you have Prepared. You can only spend spell slots on spells that you have Prepared. If you're a Bard or a Sorcerer, you will only ever Know a small subset of the total selection of spells, but what you Know and you have Prepared is always the same. If you're a Wizard, you can potentially Know all spells, but you don't at the beginning. You Know more spells by picking new ones as you level up, and getting scrolls, and learning from spellbooks and other Wizards, etc. Out of all the spells you Know, you will pick a small subset, based on your Intelligence, that you have Prepared. These are the only spells that you can spend spell slots on. If you're a Cleric or Druid, you already Know all spells. Out of all the spells you Know, you will pick a small subset, based on your Wisdom, that you have Prepared. These are the only spells that you can spend spell slots on. If you're a Druid of the Circle of the Land, the Circle Spells ability will grant you additional spells. These spells might not be from the standard Druid spell list, AND they're always Prepared, without counting against the limited set of Wisdom-based Prepared spells. If you're a Cleric, your Domain will grant you a set of Domain spells. These spells might not be from the standard Cleric spell list, AND they're always Prepared, without counting against the limited set of Wisdom-based Prepared spells.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 03:34
|
|
|
Spell slots are kind of like money at a busy cash-only bar. You've got a wallet full of slot-money that you use to pay for your spell-beer, The bartender is an rear end in a top hat that only ever takes one bill and assumes that any change is his tip. You can't shove a fistful of singles in his face to pay for a fifth-level spell, you have to give him a fiver or more. Sometimes he gives you a really generous pour if you tip him well. The metaphorical magic-bar you're buying spell-beer at either has a fixed menu (sorcerer/warlock/bard/paladin/arcane trickster/eldritch knight) or rotating beers on tap (cleric/druid/wizard). Some bars with rotating menus brew their own stuff so they have a limited selection (wizard) and others get their stuff from regional distributors so they can pick whatever they want (cleric/druid). Cantrips are the water stations at the end of the bar that you can help yourself to because the bartender doesn't want to waste his time filling up a glass with poo poo you aren't going to tip him for. ...I've lost control of this metaphor.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 04:08
|
|
|
Roll a homebrew artificer with a utility belt full of capsules that are basically spring loaded miniature bags of holding designed to launch wands up for you to grab. Be wizard Batman.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 06:07
|
|
|
I'll probably just copy that metaphor word for word when I explain it to my group
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 06:39
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:If you get two short rests a day you're fine. If your DM isn't giving you that then the campaign is just badly paced or going for something completely different from what the game is tentatively balanced around. Ditto if he's giving peeps good magic weapons but no rod of the pact keeper for poor warlock. Eh if you get two short rests a day you are mediocre but passable. Still mostly better off just spamming Eldritch Blast. True there is the Rod of the Pact Keeper, the only magic implement that adds to damage. But that is very poor compared to actual magic weapons. The big thing with actual magic weapons is they can get bonus dice. Quarterstaff Hexblade being a Hexblade patron with a quarterstaff and the Polearm Momentum feat or what? Which I don't think gets more than 1 attack per round, 2 with a bonus action. Hexblade patron Pact of the Blade pact with the pact weapon being a Quarterstaff? Then grabbing Polearm Momentum? I mean that could be vaguely good, not nearly as good as a Fighter of course but vaguely good. And if they actually intended for Curse Bringer to be an alternative build path for Hexblade then they are idiots instead of simply making a simple mistake. Remember none of the Invocations introduced in the Hexblade article could create a weapon for the Hexblade Pact of the Blade, and actually make use of the Hexblade patron's 1st level ability. If there was one that worked for it, and Curse Bringer was there as an alternative that would be one thing, but it isn't. It is the single Pact of the Blade weapon creating Invocation that intersects both Pact of the Blade and Hexblade Patron and just straight up doesn't work with a fairly major feature of Hexblade which is just ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 07:42
|
|
|
Ryuujin posted:Eh if you get two short rests a day you are mediocre but passable. Still mostly better off just spamming Eldritch Blast. True there is the Rod of the Pact Keeper, the only magic implement that adds to damage. But that is very poor compared to actual magic weapons. The big thing with actual magic weapons is they can get bonus dice. Rod of the Pact Keeper adds +# to DCs. It's actually better than the majority of the good caster implements. Combined with the the +# to spell attack rolls, works like a charm. Pact of the Blade, yes. Otherwise, what are you doing, just dipping? You do like the most optimal Paladin: Shield + Quarterstaff, grab Polearm Master, and that's three attacks at Warlock 5. And like Paladin, this gets a power spike latter on, which in Warlock's case is CHA to damage at 12th. You're SAD so that should be 5, so you're hitting for 2d6+1d4+30. It's pretty good. But like any good bladelock you also took a level of Fighter, so you add in Dueling Style, and now it's 2d6+1d4+36. Better than a pure Fighter. And you still get Eldritch Blast as an effective ranged option. And the Hexblade 's Curse feature works fine on its own: it's a short rest boss fucker like Vengeance Paladin's Vow of Emnity. Curse Bringer was a trade-off, where if you last-hit the cursed target you get to switch it around for free (GWM synergy!), but you lose the Hexblade SADness. That's not actually a good trade, as the ability to move the curse around on last-hit isn't even that good in the first place; the actual great thing about Curse Bringer was the smite function. What do you get, then, when you take Curse Bringer? You get the classic Greatsword Bladelock, but with much more damage potential through archetype features synergizing with GWM, and less MAD since their spell slots can be used for 2d8 per level smites. It works. It doesn't even need a fighter dip to be functional, like other bladelocks. Really, the flaw here was that figuring all this poo poo out takes more system mastery than coming up with a good monk, which is too much to ask of the player base.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 11:17
|
|
|
When someone says they're playing a warlock in 5E I just assume they mean warlock2/3+sorcerer rest because that's how I'd play it. Quickened Eldritch Blasts (or any other Quickened Spell + Eldritch Blast) plus short rest slots that can be converted into sorcery points. Why play a straight warlock over that?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 15:08
|
|
|
Because if you're going for pure damage, then you probably don't want to play a Warlock to begin with. Min/Maxing is not all that fun for some of us.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 15:17
|
|
|
Philthy posted:Because if you're going for pure damage, then you probably don't want to play a Warlock to begin with. Min/Maxing is not all that fun for some of us. Sorlock is one of the top DPR options in 5e along with fighter/paladin/rogue shenanigans. It's fine that it's not your cup of tea but there's a reason warlocks are often brought up in min/max conversations.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 15:22
|
|
|
Philthy posted:Because if you're going for pure damage, then you probably don't want to play a Warlock to begin with. Min/Maxing is not all that fun for some of us. I just don't see a reason to go all warlock aside from multiclassing being not permitted. Even as far as utility goes the sorcerer can get a fair amount of it, really the main thing you'd lose out on is some of the higher-level invocations, but you'll get a lot more spell slots to compensate so it's probably a wash at worst. Edit: Unless you really have your heart set on one of those mid-to-high-level invocations that gives you a specific all-day guaranteed benefit, I suppose. Magil Zeal fucked around with this message at 15:48 on Sep 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 15:44
|
|
|
Magil Zeal posted:I just don't see a reason to go all warlock aside from multiclassing being not permitted. Even as far as utility goes the sorcerer can get a fair amount of it, really the main thing you'd lose out on is some of the higher-level invocations, but you'll get a lot more spell slots to compensate so it's probably a wash at worst. Because you want to roleplay a warlock
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 16:10
|
|
|
Multiclassing delays your higher level spells; that's enough of a case to stick with Warlock until 17th, specially for Tomelocks who are pulling double duty as ritual casters.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 16:11
|
|
|
I mean, if you only take 3 levels of Warlock you aren't really a Warlock, you're a Sorcerer who dipping Warlock at the cost of their spell progression because they want more cantrips and have a higher at-will damage potential.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 16:12
|
|
|
esquilax posted:Because you want to roleplay a warlock i can roleplay a warlock without taking even 1 level in the class
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 16:37
|
|
|
Magil Zeal posted:I just don't see a reason to go all warlock aside from multiclassing being not permitted. Even as far as utility goes the sorcerer can get a fair amount of it, really the main thing you'd lose out on is some of the higher-level invocations, but you'll get a lot more spell slots to compensate so it's probably a wash at worst. Foresight quicker. You could still do 3 levels of some other class, which a lot of people do, but you just get way more perks going down the Warlock path. The new Invocations coming out are pretty nuts, too. Eldritch blast fireballs if it makes it, will be kind of over the top.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 16:43
|
|
|
esquilax posted:Because you want to roleplay a warlock Conspiratiorist posted:I mean, if you only take 3 levels of Warlock you aren't really a Warlock, you're a Sorcerer who dipping Warlock at the cost of their spell progression because they want more cantrips and have a higher at-will damage potential. I guess my view on this is different since my main group (the one I DM for) has always had a pretty easy-going attitude about reskinning and flavor in general being mutable. I see nothing wrong with a warlock2/sorcerer6 roleplaying as, well, a warlock.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:26
|
|
|
Magil Zeal posted:I guess my view on this is different since my main group (the one I DM for) has always had a pretty easy-going attitude about reskinning and flavor in general being mutable. I see nothing wrong with a warlock2/sorcerer6 roleplaying as, well, a warlock. Reskinning is just the absolute thing for character creation. I've got a player using a Lawful Good Rogue with the Soldier background. Thus, he decided that he's a police investigator, and even still has the badge. Not every rogue needs to be street scum!
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:32
|
|
|
Magil Zeal posted:I guess my view on this is different since my main group (the one I DM for) has always had a pretty easy-going attitude about reskinning and flavor in general being mutable. I see nothing wrong with a warlock2/sorcerer6 roleplaying as, well, a warlock. I meant mechanically. These discussions are always about mechanics. Flavor can of course be whatever people want, anal auto-spelunking notwithstanding.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:38
|
|
|
Zomborgon posted:Reskinning is just the absolute thing for character creation. I've got a player using a Lawful Good Rogue with the Soldier background. Thus, he decided that he's a police investigator, and even still has the badge. Not every rogue needs to be street scum! I agree 100%. I have a player in a 4E game of mine who is extremely in favor of reskinning; her shaman character is, according to her, actually just an empty human shell with no personality possessed by her spirit companions (multiple, because Elemental Priest theme), who are from Athas (the campaign takes place in 4E FR). She's actually really a shaman/warlord hybrid with all "lazy" powers which are fluffed as her spirits possessing the party members temporarily, so she effectively ignores all the warlord fluff. When we briefly considered switching the 4E campaign over to 5E our Twofold Star/Dark Pact warlock was actually going to be a UA Shadow Sorcerer with Warlock levels and GOO Pact, which we felt was good enough in terms of accurately representing his patrons (and the shadow dog was going to be refluffed into the owlbear he got from Fey Beast Tamer theme). With Shadow Sorcerer basically being reworked thematically into powers from his Dark Pact patron. I'm used to my players doing wacky stuff conceptually that don't always fit mechanics 100%, but I think we all make a good-faith effort to use mechanics we like and making them thematically appropriate to our characters rather than strictly staying within the class concepts.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
The problem isn't one of reskinning - the problem is that multiclassing out of warlock is mechanically a better option then staying in the warlock class in just about any given situation because so little attention was paid to how the classes actually play out. In a good game, sorcerer/warlock multiclass would be DIFFERENT from sorcerer and warlock, not just straight up better - and it is for the sorcerer! But the warlock is poorly made, and people are trying to make due with what they've got. Don't blame the players for a broken game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 21:17
|
|
|
LOL, nothing is broken. Okay, Cube of Force is. But nothing else!
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 21:47
|
|
|
My high-level Wizard in Adventurer's League gave his Cube of Force to his simulacrum. I have it cast a concentration debuff, hit the cube, and go block a hallway. The actual wizard flies around on a no-attunement-required Broom of Flying making GBS threads out even more debuffs. gently caress wizards.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 23:28 |
|
|
Ok, so lets say you have a walking sorcerer with hands and legs and the head of a fish. Basically a fish-man with gills and fishskin. What would this humanoid taste like? Asking because I kind of tricked my party into eating one after I dragged its corpse onto the ship and rolled high on persuading the chef into making it tonights dinner. Dm called it as tough but fish-like.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 22:40
|
|
