|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:You can add your own stuff to OrcPub - their workaround is having an importer. Just google for the files to import. It's OK, my uncle works at WotC. Ask me about D&D 5.5.
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 18:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 04:49 |
|
|
The Gate posted:Galaxy Brain: Play a sorcerer and cast counterspell with Subtle metamagic so they can't see you casting it and can't counterspell you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 18:18
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:Do this if you want your petty tyrant DM to go berserk over you interrupting his smug NPC That's just a bonus! You can also use distant metamagic to counterspell from far enough away they can't counter back.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 18:22
|
|
|
I dunno, the last time I countered my petty tyrant DM's plan (by turning invisible to escape with the Macguffin at the end of his monologue), he had his NPC "use a magic ring" that gave him unerring magical tracking of the Macguffin anyway (enough to target and attack my square). When I led him on a chase to escape, I discovered that it had unlimited range. When that didn't work, he ran off, grabbed a wizard, gave him the ring, and had the wizard cast faerie fire all in the same action. He really didn't want me keeping that thing. But gently caress him, I sleight of hand-ed the ring off the wizard and my allies broke his concentration, so I escaped anyway.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 18:32
|
|
|
Thoughts on the Mystic? One build I'm looking at: Changeling, Order of the Awakened, Mind Thrust, Mantle of Command and something else. This UA document is very large.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 19:46
|
|
|
Admiral Joeslop posted:Thoughts on the Mystic? One build I'm looking at: Changeling, Order of the Awakened, Mind Thrust, Mantle of Command and something else. It's bad form to force your DM to read through 28 pages of dandwiki-quality homebrew.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 19:49
|
|
|
Admiral Joeslop posted:Thoughts on the Mystic? One build I'm looking at: Changeling, Order of the Awakened, Mind Thrust, Mantle of Command and something else. The Mystic is fun but a bit unwieldy. It can be anything you want it to be, and the biggest complaint I have is that it offers an overwhelming amount of options for any individual round - causing a lot of slowdown if the player doesn't restrict themselves. Beyond all that, a psionic basically sidesteps all the rules involving spellcasting. Plus their abilities precisely target typically weak saves like INT. So balance is really going to require a levelheaded DM and a reasonable player to get right. Ex: I've got a Mystic in my campaign who basically wants to appear outwardly pacifistic, while simultaneously mindslamming and thought-controlling everyone he comes across. Can NPCs even recognize that the psionic is using her abilities? RAW there's no guidance either way. How do you rule in a way that recognizes the unique traits of psionic casting without functionally giving them permanent invisibility? Conversely, when I played a Mystic I built a character that was powerful at range, in melee, and during non-combat. It took surprise legendary enemies to slow me down, while the rest of the party struggled to keep up. As a player it was frustrating for the difficulty to suddenly and significantly increase just for my character, but as a DM I understand the conundrum that I put the DM into. Finding a good balance that empowers the player without doing a disservice to the rest of the party is always difficult, but particularly with a class that is as slippery as the Mystic. Kaal fucked around with this message at 20:50 on Mar 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 20:40
|
|
|
Kaal posted:The Mystic is fun but a bit unwieldy. It can be anything you want it to be, and the biggest complaint I have is that it offers an overwhelming amount of options for any individual round - causing a lot of slowdown if the player doesn't restrict themselves. Beyond all that, a psionic basically sidesteps all the rules involving spellcasting. Plus their abilities precisely target typically weak saves like INT. So balance is really going to require a levelheaded DM and a reasonable player to get right. I went with two builds. Warforged (Envoy) Soul Knife: Mastery of Force and Psychic Hammer. Changeling Awakened: Mantle of Command, Precognition, Psychic Assault, Mind Thrust. Soul Knife is adequate but can also be roleplayed as robot Darth Vader. Awakened lets me reposition allies when needed, have a better chance of going first, and doing decent enough damage.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 21:28
|
|
|
This thread makes me feel a lot better about my group and my DMing abilities in general.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 01:05
|
|
|
I ran a one shot where everyone had to play an orc mystic. It was fun but everyone agreed that it mystic is cumbersome and just felt disconnected from the rest of the D&D world.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 01:18
|
|
|
Hey there D&D thread, I have a couple of questions. First one is pretty simple: I'm about to go into Curse of Strahd, planning on playing a Tiefling Warlock (Hexblade 3) and immediately multi-class into Shadow Sorceror. Any advice I should keep in mind? Second, is does anyone have any experience with the Talent Trees homebrew? My GM is replacing feats with it, and I don't know anything about it other than that it was made by two reddit users (/u/Craios125 and /u/ImFromNASA) and we get two talent points to start with. At the moment I'm looking to beeline to Resilient to pick up the Con save proficiency but just wanted to make sure that there wasn't any obvious traps I was falling into. Will keep the thread updated with stories once the game begins proper.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 02:24
|
|
|
Hattie Masters posted:First one is pretty simple: I'm about to go into Curse of Strahd, planning on playing a Tiefling Warlock (Hexblade 3) and immediately multi-class into Shadow Sorceror. Any advice I should keep in mind? I’m playing this type of sorlock in Dungeons of the Mad Mage now, at level 8 currently. I did shadow sorc to 5 first to get fireball earlier and better saves then filled in the three levels of hexblade. Also think about whether two or three levels of warlock would be best. I’m the only arcane caster in my group so I felt ritual casting would be worth it but there are good arguments for the 2 level dip. Try to pick up elven advantage at some point with your see-through darkness shenanigans.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 02:43
|
|
|
Hattie Masters posted:Hey there D&D thread, I have a couple of questions. Also you're starting at 3, yeah? 'Cause I started at 1 and for flavor reasons, had to use the same weapon I'd be using at 3, and because it was 2-handed, couldn't get my good good charisma bonus on it until I took Pact of the Blade.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 02:56
|
|
|
My DM has literally banned Hexblades from multiclassing in his games, because he thinks it's seriously overpowered, especially in certain combinations. I don't necessarily disagree (A single level dip in hexblade for paladins is some poo poo) but it's still kinda lol.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 06:56
|
|
|
Sometimes I feel like there are negative effects on my dice, so I cleanse them in a salt or crystal bath. If I’m cleaning my crystals, I’ll throw them into the same pot and put them under the moonlight, or soak them in rain water and say a blessing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 07:10
|
|
|
ban multiclassing altogether
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 07:14
|
|
|
Ginger Beer Belly posted:His primary concern is that if the initiative order goes NPC wizard, party cleric, affected PC, then RAW would mean that the NPC wizard could cast the spell, the party cleric could cast dispel magic, and then the affected PC doesn't even need to make a saving throw and a 4th level spell was trivially negated. Beyond what others have (correctly) said about this, point out that in order to reliably cast Dispel Magic against a 4th-level spell, the cleric has to cast Dispel Magic as a 4th-level spell; otherwise, the cleric has to make a 14 DC Wisdom check. So a character is using a 3rd-level spell slot to maybe cancel a 4th-level spell, or using a 4th-level spell slot to definitely cancel a 4th-level spell. It is not "trivially negated".
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 07:21
|
|
|
Level by level multiclassing was and is a hideous mistake.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 08:01
|
|
|
Besesoth posted:Beyond what others have (correctly) said about this, point out that in order to reliably cast Dispel Magic against a 4th-level spell, the cleric has to cast Dispel Magic as a 4th-level spell; otherwise, the cleric has to make a 14 DC Wisdom check. So a character is using a 3rd-level spell slot to maybe cancel a 4th-level spell, or using a 4th-level spell slot to definitely cancel a 4th-level spell. It is not "trivially negated". You and everyone before in the thread make very good points that basically support the idea that 5e has been balanced around the concept of action economy and that arbitrarily modifying the rules outside of some glaring edge cases (rogue with magic initiate and a familiar doing the help action every round is going to annoy a reasonable DM) doesn't actually help things. The group I play with are my friends, not people that are friends because I play with them, and our sessions are fun, despite the frustrations around rules application, so any flavor of  isn't the answer.As I mentioned before, the DM previously ran 2e campaigns. The reason we're currently playing 5e is simply because of the availability of online tools such as dndbeyond and roll20. If it weren't for them, we'd be running a 2e campaign and therefore the DM isn't super invested in 5e as a system, more as a convenience and I think this has a lot to do with his tendency to approach the rules as "what seems right to him" vs "this is a contained system that has had balance baked into it". I like to think of myself as someone who will bring up concerns about rules whether or not they are beneficial to myself, or the party (such as reminding the DM that he needs to make our cleric or our druid make a concentration save when they take damage), but, I could have very selective memory there. True or not, his opinion of me is that I am absolutely a rules lawyer (to be fair, I'm literally asking questions about the rules on Internet forums right now and I guarantee neither he nor any other player in the group would do so), so I really want to minimize disagreeing about rules, especially in the middle of the game simply because it's not fun for everyone at the table. The DM has created an engaging world with a complex plot with multiple adversaries that are actually working against each other, creating opportunities to make temporary tense alliances, so I wouldn't agree with some earlier accusations that the DM just wants to railroad the players and give us no agency. In fact, I was the one who suggested to him that he maybe needed to provide an obvious narrative path to keep the story going as the group would descend into complete analysis paralysis in an information vacuum. We're nearing spring and biking season for the weekends, so the DM wants to only have 2 more sessions and would like to wrap up some story arcs. Given all that, I'd really prefer to avoid a major argument over rules, especially since I think it's perceived that the reason I'm arguing them is simply to provide myself or the party an edge over the NPCs, I am absolutely a tactical junkie who looks at the grid battlefield as a problem to solve and know that my passion in that arena makes it hard for the DM to accept that my arguments for the rules we've been talking about in this thread aren't just me trying to gain an advantage. Anyway, I appreciate the feedback, agree with it, but don't think it's wise for me to aggressively push for any of them with just 2 sessions to go as that'll just create tension. After the campaign is over, I'll push the DM to do some research on 5e balance, and go on forums himself to ask questions as the answers given here should make him reconsider his current opinions.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 09:19
|
|
|
JustJeff88 posted:I enjoyed it as well. Even if the DM misread the rules, it seemed perfectly appropriate to me that a "boss monster" could get up after the fight was won, drop one last big spell and then get his head punched off. Since nobody in the party died because of it (correct me if I am wrong), I think that it's fine. You're correct ... noone died. I'll very subtly update the DM that no, your NPC doesn't automatically stand up on the 3rd successful death save, but, it was fun. 3 of us went unconscious but noone died. I would have called BS had the DM instead had the wizard Dimension Door away and escape after making his saves, vs making a suicidal last-gasp action. Ginger Beer Belly fucked around with this message at 16:28 on Mar 7, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 09:36
|
|
|
It honestly sounds more than a bit like your DM is using you as props to finish his own storyarcs in the tangled web he's woven in this game world since his teens, and that any alliance or agenda your party may have is entirely secondary to what his NPCs are scheming against each other. I've been in that exact place with my first DM and this is throwing up some red flags. If you're okay with sitting down and holding your peace for the remaining two sessions, more power to you. I'd find it aggravating; I might put up with it for a limited time, but only if I had a guarantee that would be the end of it, or at least that we'd have a frank talk about expectations and the game system, but even then it would pretty much kill my engagement in the game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 09:50
|
|
|
Hattie Masters posted:Hey there D&D thread, I have a couple of questions. Why not start with your first level in Sorcerer so you get CON saves right off? Infinity Gaia posted:My DM has literally banned Hexblades from multiclassing in his games, because he thinks it's seriously overpowered, especially in certain combinations. I don't necessarily disagree (A single level dip in hexblade for paladins is some poo poo) but it's still kinda lol. Complaining about multiclasses being overpowered is a pedestrian-level understanding of 5e as a system, given the bullshit single classes can get up to. Conspiratiorist fucked around with this message at 10:01 on Mar 7, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 09:56
|
|
|
I've been offered the new artificer in a game, what's the problems good bits etc? Specifically warforged artillery.ProfessorCirno posted:Level by level multiclassing was and is a hideous mistake.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 11:32
|
|
|
I've now learned that the 3-5 adventure coming up in my group will be PHB only. I guess I'll just roll standard Paladin or Wizard or something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 13:11
|
|
|
I'd rather play Fighter than Paladin on a game that only goes 3-5.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 13:21
|
|
|
Rogue or revised ranger. All the skills, none of the paperwork. You're on one attack per round but gently caress it so is everyone else.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 13:23
|
|
|
What about Halfling Fighter with two rapiers and the two weapon style? Two attacks at level three with mods on both, some manuevers, whatever. The only penalty to two weapon fighting is normally not adding your damage mod to the second attack right? Edit: Rapiers aren't light. I guess a short sword isn't that much worse.. Admiral Joeslop fucked around with this message at 13:39 on Mar 7, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 13:32
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:Why not start with your first level in Sorcerer so you get CON saves right off? Cuz then I'd just take the thing to get the WIS save. So it's an either or situation, and in a dumb way I have somewhat of a reputation to maintain with going Warlock, since I tend to play Hexblades in order to be a not completely useless martial equivalent. Stroop There It Is posted:Which weapon are you gonna go with for Hexblade? Starting at 3, yes. And going Pact of the Blade (yes i know it's a trap but I like it the most, and being able to summon a weapon is really useful with my GM), taking Improved Pact Weapon as one of the invocations in order to get that sweet immediate +1. As for weapons, I'm going either Longsword or Rapier + shield.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 13:44
|
|
|
Admiral Joeslop posted:What about Halfling Fighter with two rapiers and the two weapon style? Two attacks at level three with mods on both, some manuevers, whatever. The only penalty to two weapon fighting is normally not adding your damage mod to the second attack right? From a purely mechanical standpoint: You need a Feat for two rapiers, which presents an opportunity cost vs just boosting your combat stat and using axes/shortswords, which nets you better hit/damage/etc. A greatsword with GWF fighting style is better damage than two shortswords. A rapier with shield and Dueling fighting style is almost the same damage (~22.5 vs 21) as two shortswords, but with +2 AC. Any polearm plus Polearm Master is straight up vastly superior to dual-wielding. Dual wielding is a weak option in DnD the Fifth.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 13:48
|
|
|
Admiral Joeslop posted:What about Halfling Fighter with two rapiers and the two weapon style? Two attacks at level three with mods on both, some manuevers, whatever. The only penalty to two weapon fighting is normally not adding your damage mod to the second attack right? The biggest penalty to TWF is eating your bonus action to do it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 14:01
|
|
|
Hattie Masters posted:Cuz then I'd just take the thing to get the WIS save. So it's an either or situation, and in a dumb way I have somewhat of a reputation to maintain with going Warlock, since I tend to play Hexblades in order to be a not completely useless martial equivalent. That's why I went with it and that invocation too (also again for flavor reasons--the sword is the patron, who is possessing a human merc; mechanically it's a totally normal sword and he's a normal human), and it's worked perfectly well so far. I also took the War Caster feat, which you may want to do--in addition to the other benefits, you don't need a free hand for somatic spellcasting. IIRC, Improved Pact Weapon lets you use it as a spellcasting focus, but if something has somatic but not material components, you would need a free hand to cast without the feat. And Eldritch Blast is VS, not VSM. That said... a lot of DMs wouldn't really care and would just let you cast the dang spell.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 15:18
|
|
|
I'm playing a tempest cleric in 5e who has been worshipping a false god/eldritch horror. He realized that this thing was no god and was evil and is on his way to slay it. He found a new god to worship but his current god Zargon is blocking attempts to contact or reach out to other gods. How do I go about dealing with this? Do I talk to the DM and ask to temporarily swap my cleric levels with fighter levels to avoid his influence? Idk how to tackle this. It looks like 1-3 sessions from now we should be fighting him.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 15:31
|
|
|
Stout Halfling Fighter: Dueling, Disarming/Parry/Trip Variant Human Fighter: GWF, Polearm Mastery, Disarming/Menacing/Trip Both seem fun, Halfling has a little more flavor than Big Human with Big Weapon.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 16:05
|
|
|
FWIW, if I were your DM and you took the great weapon fighting style, I'd let you use a greatsword/greataxe on a halfling because that image rules.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 16:07
|
|
|
Admiral Joeslop posted:Stout Halfling Fighter: Dueling, Disarming/Parry/Trip You can use Polearm Master with a spear, too. PS you should get Precision because missing sucks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 16:17
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:Level by level multiclassing was and is a hideous mistake. Introduced in PHB Chapter 6 along with feats and these words: "This chapter defines two optional sets of rules..." Assuming they're core rules is almost as irritating as assuming that all campaigns allow multiple splat-books. The game is supposedly designed to be balanced only if characters are built using PHB and only one additional book or source. That means no Hexblades with Booming or Green-Flame Blade, for example. That doesn't mean everything is balanced perfectly anyway, just that the actual balance point of the game is pretty far from the set of options most people are using to analyze it. Offering optional rules that can break the system seems like the opposite of a mistake to me. It'd have been easy enough to omit them entirely. If a system is designed (as 5E is) to be accessible to new players, you have to write with the assumption that a group could have no experienced RPG players at all; giving them some options about how in-or-out-of-control their gaming fun is makes good sense. Meanwhile, many of us who grew up with random stat rolling (GM-witnessed, for all you "I really rolled 18(00) Strength again" people), rolled hp at 1st level, and unbalanced random encounter tables find all the emphasis on "balance" to be a bit odd. If Conan had powers of sorcery, he wouldn't be Conan; making effective use of the tools your character possesses in distinctive and stylish ways can be more fun than min/maxing the tools available to you, especially when the GM gives you all opportunities to shine. Don't get me wrong, the old-school game was not well designed. But that doesn't mean that every player determines the amount of fun they have by whether their character is more or less powerful than the others' PCs, either.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 16:20
|
|
|
RC Cola posted:I'm playing a tempest cleric in 5e who has been worshipping a false god/eldritch horror. He realized that this thing was no god and was evil and is on his way to slay it. He found a new god to worship but his current god Zargon is blocking attempts to contact or reach out to other gods. How do I go about dealing with this? Do I talk to the DM and ask to temporarily swap my cleric levels with fighter levels to avoid his influence? Idk how to tackle this. It looks like 1-3 sessions from now we should be fighting him. Your wording here is a little confusing. Is Zargon the eldritch false god or the new god? Is this restriction DM imposed or is this part of your character's backstory? If the DM is imposing this restriction its not exactly fair on you from a playing perspective so kindly ask him/her to rethink their decision or at least come up with creative and fun way for to adventure with this storyline.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 16:20
|
|
|
Narsham posted:Introduced in PHB Chapter 6 along with feats and these words: "This chapter defines two optional sets of rules..." "Feats are an optional rule" is the greatest copout, followed only by thinking PHB+1 is a matter of game balance when it explicitly isn't so.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 16:24
|
|
|
Narsham posted:Introduced in PHB Chapter 6 along with feats and these words: "This chapter defines two optional sets of rules..." AL allows multiclassing and feats and I've never seen a game where they weren't used, although they are strict about PHB+1. It's pretty wild that the designers straight-up say they didn't balance around multiclassing but then include it in their only standardized way of playing (not that WotC supports or pays much attention to AL...)
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 16:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 04:49 |
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:You can use Polearm Master with a spear, too. I guess that's in errata somewhere? I suppose the benefit is the free opportunity attack if anything moves next to me, with the +2 from Dueling helping the lower damage? Edit: I've learned that Crawford says you can't use Shield Master to knock someone prone before you attack, it has to be after. Crawford is bad. Admiral Joeslop fucked around with this message at 16:46 on Mar 7, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 16:36
|
|