|
We need to start a Twitter campaign where we tweet the dumbest possible questions at Jeremey Crawford "If I am playing a Minotaur and attach two Horseshoes of speed to my feet (not wearing boots) and two to my hands (one is the Hand of Vecna) and run on all fours, do I receive the benefits?" Ceros_X fucked around with this message at 15:27 on Jun 4, 2019 |
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 15:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 16:29 |
|
|
I think "can minotaurs wear magic horseshoes" is a good starting point. If he says yes, that's when you follow up with "can they also wear shoes? "
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 15:54
|
|
|
I guess the serious answer id give is that, assuming the full set has to be worn, all four have to be in the character’s possession even if only two can be worn. And they can’t wear boots because they have hooves.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 16:15
|
|
|
If a gnome and a halfling get it on are babies possible and if so what bonuses do they get as adults?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 16:56
|
|
|
a dude in the AL Facebook group yesterday went on a big tirade about owl familiars being able to wear magic rings after one DM casually said "nah i wouldn't allow that at my table". he thought that his bird anatomy-based arguments would sway the DM who was just batting down his dumbass gimmick of using a ring of spell storing to caste haste on a rogue via owl familiar... it went on for dozens and dozens of comments.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 17:28
|
|
|
Azza Bamboo posted:If a gnome and a halfling get it on are babies possible and if so what bonuses do they get as adults? In all cases race follows the mother, no half-whatever  poo poo.Possibly less hairy feet if the father was a gnome.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 17:30
|
|
|
Kaysette posted:a dude in the AL Facebook group yesterday went on a big tirade about owl familiars being able to wear magic rings after one DM casually said "nah i wouldn't allow that at my table". he thought that his bird anatomy-based arguments would sway the DM who was just batting down his dumbass gimmick of using a ring of spell storing to caste haste on a rogue via owl familiar... it went on for dozens and dozens of comments. Also haste is a 30 feet range spell, why would you need a familiar to cast it?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 17:36
|
|
|
Schadenboner posted:In all cases race follows the mother, no half-whatever Why do half elves, half orcs, and tieflings exist if this is the case?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 17:38
|
|
|
Mr. Humalong posted:Why do half elves, half orcs, and tieflings exist if this is the case? Well a Tiefling's kid is always a tiefling, and sometimes they just spontaneously appear to human parents.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 17:47
|
|
|
Toplowtech posted:1) magic items attuned on the familiar count as attuned on the familiar owner That's already the rule in AL. Toplowtech posted:2) people will see the magic bling on your familiar, kill it and run away with the ring and they won't give it back." Then ask the player if they still think it's a good idea. You can't really do that in AL.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 17:48
|
|
|
Put up with the bling owl for a very long time. A very long time. Make sure it's obvious you're angry, but store up any repercussions for the finale: My dragon is wearing their entire hoard.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 17:50
|
|
|
I like this thread and all but all this shield and holding chat makes me wonder what kinds of players and DMs have hurt you
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 17:51
|
|
|
Don't use in game rules to "punish" player behavior. Also don't punish players for wanting familiars to be cool with very little actual mechanical benefit wtf
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 17:52
|
|
|
Kaysette posted:You can't really do that in AL. Would an enemy be unable to do that in AL?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 17:56
|
|
|
I used to do the hurting when we played pathfinder. I had a low level monk / psychic warrior whose AC and other defenses were just impenetrable and he could do flips and poo poo. He didn't hit very hard, so in effect he was just there to be there, and without handwaving it'd be very hard for him not to be there. I then gave him a typical shonen manga "NO ONE CAN TOUCH ME, AHAHAHAHA, I'M THE BEST" attitude. Because he could barely output damage, and because the GM was reluctant to waste cool attacks on the impenetrable wall, the combats hit the other characters harder than it should do while my guy stood in the wreckage. Because my guy was impenetrable, he'd eventually win a war of attrition with the meagre attacks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 17:57
|
|
|
If you don't dress your snake familiars like Sir Hiss I really don't know what's wrong with you.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 17:59
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:Would an enemy be unable to do that in AL? I guess it depends if you're taking the magic item away temporarily or permanently. You could say that it's gone for that module but the player would need to have it back at the end. The only way you can really lose an item in AL is if it's one of the item effects (i.e., breaking a staff of power on purpose). At least that's my read from the FAQ.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 18:01
|
|
|
A friend is running a home brew world campaign. This is gonna be my first time playing D&D. I've played some Vampire before. I want to run a rogue based off of Locke Lamora from the Gentleman Bastards series. This means basically being a priest of a secret thief God while pretending to be a priest of another God and using that as a base to run elaborate heists on rich idiots through costumes and forgery and stuff like that. 5th edition is a bit overwhelming for me with the amount of choices in character creation. What archetype looks good for that? I was thinking Arcane Trickster for more shenangians. This is mostly a social character but I also don't want to be useless in combat. I was thinking crossbows for combat mostly. Are there any must have proficiencies and other things I shouldn't skip or any things that are completely useless?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 20:09
|
|
|
There is the trickery domain for clerics, if you wanted to start there. Alternatively, Rogue with Arcane Trickster could work. Cleric/Rogue isn't the most synergistic multiclass but it doesn't actively work against itself either.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 20:20
|
|
|
Be whatever class you want (Arcane Trickster is probably the most on-theme, but something like a Shadow Monk could be interesting), and take the Acolyte background for the secret thief god.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 20:23
|
|
|
I was mostly thinking Arcane Trickster because I don't really see the other archetypes working too well with my idea of the character. Maybe Assassins because of the bonuses to disguise? I'm not sold on magic as a part of the character.Infinite Karma posted:Be whatever class you want (Arcane Trickster is probably the most on-theme, but something like a Shadow Monk could be interesting), and take the Acolyte background for the secret thief god. Oo I was thinking Charlatan but this could also work really well.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 20:24
|
|
|
Miftan posted:I was mostly thinking Arcane Trickster because I don't really see the other archetypes working too well with my idea of the character. Maybe Assassins because of the bonuses to disguise? I'm not sold on magic as a part of the character. Most of the stuff that forms the core concept of your character either isn't really all that well supported by the system or is covered by the Try Lore Bard with the Charlatan background feature (mainly so you can just declare your false priest identity from the get go without needing to roll anything). There's also College of Whispers but that's more of a dark assassin/immediate impersonator, while Lore Bard is just good at everything (more skills, more stolen spells, better Bardic Inspiration uses). ED: a D&D priest without magic is an exceptionally lovely priest. Conspiratiorist fucked around with this message at 20:37 on Jun 4, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 20:34
|
|
|
Tibalt posted:Don't use in game rules to "punish" player behavior. Also don't punish players for wanting familiars to be cool with very little actual mechanical benefit wtf I would believe the concern would be using the owl as a second action to cast a spell, or as a way to go beyond magic attunement limits. If that's not the issue at hand, and the player just wants to bling out their familiar but otherwise treat the item as a mechanically normal ring, then I agree. Typically a familiar could not be used to cast Haste since its range is not touch - if they're just trying to find a way to bend the rules just enough to use their action and the familiar's reaction to cast haste (effectively tripling or quadrupling the spell's range), then that would be the kind of minor mechanical benefit that would probably be just fine for me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 20:42
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:Most of the stuff that forms the core concept of your character either isn't really all that well supported by the system or is covered by the I will give that a look, thank you. I was thinking of home brewing the background if my DM lets me to combine charlatan and acolyte. Bards get some magic iirc, can I pass that off as basic priest magic?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 20:46
|
|
|
The rules allow you to pick whatever background feature you want and then combine skills/tools as you see fit. Bard has access to a few Cleric spells and can also steal some more through the Magical Secrets feature.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 20:51
|
|
|
Bard looks very magic heavy which is not really what I was going for. I was thinking more of a con artist, but maybe I should reconsider that nonmagical aspect of the character..
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 20:59
|
|
|
If you don't want any magic at all then Thief or Mastermind is fine.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 21:23
|
|
|
Miftan posted:Bard looks very magic heavy which is not really what I was going for. I was thinking more of a con artist, but maybe I should reconsider that nonmagical aspect of the character.. it's (non-4th edition) D&D, so you definitely should - both from a general "spells are where the power is" game effectiveness perspective, as well as the fact that only casters really benefit from leveraging Charisma mechanically and martial classes already tend more towards MAD-ness so Bard/Paladin/Sorcerer/Warlock of these Bards are probably the best bet since they have class features that would be of use when it comes to running mundane scams and their spell list is just chock-full of extremely useful magical effects for such endeavors (mundane or otherwise) and notably short on blasting their enemies with bolts of arcane energy Dex-based Paladin might also be a good fit, especially with the whole "fake priest" thing, but I'm not sure that there is an official oath that particularly supports the concept e: actually so would a Celestial Warlock if you're capable of envisioning the character as being actually empowered by the thief god and reflavoring Eldrich Bolt spam as throwing shadow daggers or something, some of the less-commonly used Invocations would be extremely useful (i.e. you can have at-will disguise self starting at level 2) LGD fucked around with this message at 21:59 on Jun 4, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 21:50
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:ED: a D&D priest without magic is an exceptionally lovely priest.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 21:52
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:I don't think that's the case from a flavor standpoint - most priests aren't Clerics, IMO. Clerics are super-powered chosen holy warriors imbued with power from their god. The guy who leads mass is probably just a priest, not a Cleric. The guys who copy books in an abbey are just priests. If you want to fake being a priest, you don't need magic, you just need to say the right words and act like a regular priest/acolyte. Yeah that's what I was going for. LGD posted:it's (non-4th edition) D&D, so you definitely should - both from a general "spells are where the power is" game effectiveness perspective, as well as the fact that only casters really benefit from leveraging Charisma mechanically and martial classes already tend more towards MAD-ness Yeah, you're probably right. Gonna start with a level of rogue and multiclass into Bard at level 2 for all the fun stuff. First level of rogue for tons of extra skills and thieves' tools etc.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 21:59
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:I don't think that's the case from a flavor standpoint - most priests aren't Clerics, IMO. Clerics are super-powered chosen holy warriors imbued with power from their god. The guy who leads mass is probably just a priest, not a Cleric. The guys who copy books in an abbey are just priests. If you want to fake being a priest, you don't need magic, you just need to say the right words and act like a regular priest/acolyte. This is true. I just got my mind momentarily poisoned by all the people who feel they need to take Cleric levels to represent they've found god or w/e.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 22:56
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:This is true. I just got my mind momentarily poisoned by all the people who feel they need to take Cleric levels to represent they've found god or w/e. Well in this edition every holy character/creature statblock has been either been based off cleric or paladin so you wasn't wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 23:00
|
|
|
the final (?) dungeon in ToA sucks balls. I kinda think my table salvaged the previous parts by employing creative solutions and socialising encounters but there's just loving noooothing in the dungeon.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 23:20
|
|
|
Well, if nothing else, all the shield talk ITT coupled with one of those combats where the rogue had to switch back and forth from his short bow to his sword and dagger by playing the whole one item per round thing finally made me break down and house rule stowing and drawing items. One free item interaction per round is now patched so that if you are stowing or drawing equipment that's readily accessible (sheaths or belt pouches, not buried in a backpack or bag of holding) you can draw or stow up to two items with your one free interaction. In addition, I'm allowing you to change what's in your hands over the course of your turn, because the "I drop my bow on the ground" thing seems like it's going to be tactically important but I've only ever seen it matter once (barring jerk GMs who have enemies snatch your dropped equipment and run) and it just adds more book-keeping and complication to no purpose. I'm even allowing characters with Extra Attack to stab something with a sword, sheath the sword, draw a bow, and fire the bow with the second attack. Because that mostly helps martials and they could use the help. Shields still take an action to "don" or "doff" so you lose some flexibility in exchange for the AC; War Caster remains useful even with the change. (As for the original "holding" question, I'm adjudicating on a shield-by-shield basis.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 02:03
|
|
|
Narsham posted:I'm even allowing characters with Extra Attack to stab something with a sword, sheath the sword, draw a bow, and fire the bow with the second attack. I appreciate your proactiveness but the game actually already works that way RAW.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 02:47
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:I appreciate your proactiveness but the game actually already works that way RAW. You can only interact with one item for free per round, so no. Edit: misread
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 02:53
|
|
|
Toplowtech posted:Then the DM should be more honest and open to new ideas and say "i will allow it but 1) magic items attuned on the familiar count as attuned on the familiar owner 2) people will see the magic bling on your familiar, kill it and run away with the ring and they won't give it back." Then ask the player if they still think it's a good idea. Ugggggghhhhh. Please never run a game. Basically if you think something is bad for a game, say no to it. Don't dance around it like a pedantic genie, and for the love of god don't with the "Do you still think it's a good idea?" What are you, their well-meaning but creepy uncle?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 03:00
|
|
|
Narsham posted:I'm even allowing characters with Extra Attack to stab something with a sword, sheath the sword, I dunno, sounds like it's already sheathed. Let him draw it out of that chump as an item interaction next round.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 03:01
|
|
|
Yeah you only really get to move between attacks, I believe, unless it's off an action surge or something similar.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 03:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 16:29 |
|
|
10 bucks says that guy is trying to get an extra concentration slot on the owl.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 04:31
|
|
