|
According to the Player handbook, you can decide the moment you were going to kill someone that you can just knock them out instead, regardless of damage type.
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 19:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 21:00 |
|
|
Yeah, that's something I realized later on. I never said I was punching to knock him out and it also wasn't suggested as an option, but he's new to DMing so I'll bring it up next time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 19:26
|
|
|
Team_q posted:According to the Player handbook, you can decide the moment you were going to kill someone that you can just knock them out instead, regardless of damage type. Almost; this only applies to melee attacks. You can't choose to knock opponents out with your fireball or anything.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 19:28
|
|
|
Speaking of melee attacks, I have a question. So monks can make an unarmed strike with any attack (with some caveats but generally speaking they can do it). If I use Flurry of Blows as bonus action, how many hit rolls do I have to actually make? One for the attack, and then one for Flurry of Blows? or one for the attack, and then one for each bonus attack since FoB hits twice?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 19:31
|
|
|
Kaysette posted:We had a couple deaths before 5th or 6th level. Those big boys hit hard. The cleric helped some with that and a sorlock and assassination rogue helped tear through the HP piles thrown our way. My druid also summoned shitloads of animals to basically act as ablative armor. We also usually had 5-7 players and I’m not sure how much the DM scaled things up for that. We have four players and we're a gnoll death cleric (me), a warlock, wizard, and sorcerer. I don't think we're optimized for this adventure. Nitrousoxide posted:Maybe our DM is going too easy on us, but we're barely taking any damage our campaign. We got through the siege with I think only one person taking an arrow, and the the fight on the Giant's tower in the sky had almost everyone at full health at the end, except for one who fell off the cloud and somehow survived The sky tower fight would have finished us if the giant living there hadn't intervened. I gave one of the dwarves a smite and it didn't even knock him below half. MonsterEnvy posted:What level are you at. And what type was the giant. Will give me an idea of were you are at in the adventure. We're level six. We're in Waterdeep to talk to a guy who knows about the giant/dragon feud and there's a small silver dragon that lives with him. After we visited, a cloud citadel showed up and we were attacked by a bunch of griffins and two cloud(?) giants. Serf posted:it's amazing what people can survive in desperate times Im reading your SotDL thread right now and if I can't get them to try that I'm going to try Tales from the Loop since the most vocal 5e proponent is a massive Stranger Things fan.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 19:36
|
|
|
Thumbtacks posted:Speaking of melee attacks, I have a question. When you use your bonus action to Flurry of Blows it gives you two attacks so you roll an attack for each one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
Thumbtacks posted:Speaking of melee attacks, I have a question. One for each of the attacks. So three in this case.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 19:43
|
|
|
Thumbtacks posted:sorry that was hyperbole on my part, it didn't actually come off it's a known fact that a house cat will absolutely demolish a first level adventurer
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
Cat Face Joe posted:
Hmm interesting. This is not your fault, but it makes sense these giants would overpower you. Slight spoilers. Those Giants are not supposed to be hostile according to the adventure.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
Gerdalti posted:One for each of the attacks. So three in this case. So if I'm disadvantaged, that's six rolls? That makes sense.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
Cat Face Joe posted:Im reading your SotDL thread right now and if I can't get them to try that I'm going to try Tales from the Loop since the most vocal 5e proponent is a massive Stranger Things fan. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
Thumbtacks posted:So if I'm disadvantaged, that's six rolls? That makes sense. Why would you used Flurry of Blows with disadvantage?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 20:06
|
|
|
mango sentinel posted:Why would you used Flurry of Blows with disadvantage? Guards were closing in so I figured I might as well get one last punch in. I had disadvantage because I was holding the lockbox that I couldn't get open. The attack right before Flurry of Blows was me slamming the heavy box down onto the gnoll's head and then punching him twice, he gave me disadvantage because I was holding a really heavy box with one hand while I smacked him with the other one. Probably should have put it down but that would have constituted a bonus action I think, so I just went with it. It worked, he died.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
mango sentinel posted:Has anyone done a good write-up on the math of Great Weapon Master? I understand it's good, but want to see something like a graph of average damage between regular and power attacks, but do not remember my college statistics classes. I made this for my Battlemaster Crossbowman WRT the Sharpshooter feat, which is essentially the same thing:  Power attacks really shine when combined with a reliable source of advantage and/or the Precision Attack maneuver, but even baseline it's a very significant increase vs easy to hit enemies, much higher than any other feat by far. In 5e AC is very tightly bound and attack bonuses are not, so the higher your level the stronger power attacks become as you need lower and lower rolls to hit. Note that the chart is assuming a base damage of 8.5 (1d6+5, a Hand Crossbow with 20 Dex). Since two handed weapons have larger damage dice the numbers will be slightly worse for Great Weapon Master as the +10 bonus is a lower percentage of your total damage. Also you don't get +2 to hit from Archery Fighting Style, so in general the GWM is weaker than Sharpshooter but still far stronger than most other feats you could take.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 20:31
|
|
|
Thumbtacks it sounds like your group definitely is Loony Tunes with blood and gore so I guess make sure all your players are into that.Ojetor posted:I made this for my Battlemaster Crossbowman WRT the Sharpshooter feat, which is essentially the same thing: Thank you, this is a good starting point.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
Yeah the core formula is: Max AC to use GWM on = 16 - (avg dmg/2) + 16. Average damage is the average damage when you hit. It doesn't include the 10 from GWM/sharpshooter. If you want an exact formula for "with advantage", it is something like x < 0.5*(2*y + sqrt(z^2+10*z+1600) - z - 8) where y is your attack bonus and z is your average damage as described above. Pretty much gonna turn into "use it always with advantage, never without". This came from: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?472938-Great-Weapon-Mastery-How-to-5-10-Like-a-Pro EDIT: Oh also this is just maximizing average damage per round, which is what I assume you're asking for. Often the difference between 10 and 20 damage is nothing but 0 and 1 damage is huge so weight things accordingly. Don't waste your risk missing with sharpshooter so you can do 10 more damage to a 7 hp creature. Jeffrey of YOSPOS fucked around with this message at 21:03 on Oct 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 20:48
|
|
|
mango sentinel posted:Thumbtacks it sounds like your group definitely is Loony Tunes with blood and gore so I guess make sure all your players are into that. I'd never thought about phrasing it that way but that does seem to be fairly accurate.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 22:01
|
|
|
Thumbtacks posted:I'd never thought about phrasing it that way but that does seem to be fairly accurate. Send your gamemaster this link and encourage him or her to use it during sessions please https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0TmmLNYbO0
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 22:35
|
|
|
Monk Martial Arts and Flurry of Blows should probably go on the OP
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2017 00:31
|
|
|
Thumbtacks posted:I'd never thought about phrasing it that way but that does seem to be fairly accurate. Nothing wrong with that as long as everyone is on board. That'd be a hell of a surprise to spring on players mid session though 
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2017 03:24
|
|
|
My group of nerds are finally gonna try out this dumb system. I saw a character builder online a couple weeks ago but it seems to have all of its content taken down, understandably. Is there a good way to build characters now, or am I stuck with the books?
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2017 04:30
|
|
|
CommaToes posted:My group of nerds are finally gonna try out this dumb system. I saw a character builder online a couple weeks ago but it seems to have all of its content taken down, understandably. Is there a good way to build characters now, or am I stuck with the books? http://www.pathguy.com/ddnext.htm
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2017 04:38
|
|
|
Ainsley McTree posted:No totally I get it. I’m still extremely new to the game so I find a simple class that’s hard to play badly still appealing (good thing I rolled a rogue, the second best choice for that apparently), but I can definitely see why people more comfortable with the base mechanics of the game find fighter unsatisfying. except the class that's actually hard to play badly is the wizard, grab some spells and cast them when they seem like a good idea and you'll be at least as effective as someone who doesn't know much and is playing a fighter and probably almost as well as the dude who has mastered the fighter.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2017 04:53
|
|
|
Elfgames posted:except the class that's actually hard to play badly is the wizard, grab some spells and cast them when they seem like a good idea and you'll be at least as effective as someone who doesn't know much and is playing a fighter and probably almost as well as the dude who has mastered the fighter. This was always the case in 3e - wizards are, in fact, the most newbie friendly class. Because they're the only class that doesn't have to play for keeps when making character decisions. A new player isn't going to know what feats are good or how to string together combos. But with spells, if you gently caress that up, that's cool - just change to a different spell next day. But fighters? Every mistake you made in early levels will ETERNALLY haunt you. You are never allowed to make them up. EDIT: I want my guy to be kinda good at stabbing AND shooting with a bow because I'm well rounded! *like four levels later* Well, know that I know that's a terrible idea, time to...uh, die and reroll, I guess!
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2017 05:06
|
|
|
Hell, most (all?) caster classes have the "you can also drop a spell you know for another one on your spell list" caveat each time you level.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2017 05:11
|
|
|
For limited-spells-known casters like Sorcerers, swapping a spell out per level is actually pretty vital for making sure that you can actually have a spell selection that remains relevant as you progress in level. A Wizard can stop preparing sleep after level 3, but if a Sorcerer couldn’t swap out spells, they’d basically have one fewer spell known since they’d never have a reason to cast it again. You’d eventually wind up with a solid half of your spells eaten up by ones that were really good at the time but have since been eclipsed by better, higher-level spells, while the Wizard has moved on to filling their low-level slots with utility. This isn’t to say that it doesn’t let you fix your mistakes, which it does, but it serves an actual design purpose besides just making spell choice less consequential.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2017 05:44
|
|
|
blastron posted:For limited-spells-known casters like Sorcerers, swapping a spell out per level is actually pretty vital for making sure that you can actually have a spell selection that remains relevant as you progress in level. A Wizard can stop preparing sleep after level 3, but if a Sorcerer couldn’t swap out spells, they’d basically have one fewer spell known since they’d never have a reason to cast it again. You’d eventually wind up with a solid half of your spells eaten up by ones that were really good at the time but have since been eclipsed by better, higher-level spells, while the Wizard has moved on to filling their low-level slots with utility. as with everything else in d&d design, limitations on casters got relaxed and relaxed and relaxed even more because gosh darn it it just isn't fairrrrrr
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2017 15:11
|
|
|
blastron posted:For limited-spells-known casters like Sorcerers, swapping a spell out per level is actually pretty vital for making sure that you can actually have a spell selection that remains relevant as you progress in level. A Wizard can stop preparing sleep after level 3, but if a Sorcerer couldn’t swap out spells, they’d basically have one fewer spell known since they’d never have a reason to cast it again. You’d eventually wind up with a solid half of your spells eaten up by ones that were really good at the time but have since been eclipsed by better, higher-level spells, while the Wizard has moved on to filling their low-level slots with utility. Sleep is still really effective at knocking an NPC unconscious later on, especially when it's upcast to a higher spell level. "Sleep sucks after level 3" is a a cultural holdover from previous editions and isn't true anymore
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2017 15:22
|
|
|
In a way, "character choice permanence" is yet another area where the game has regressed. In 3rd Edition's PHB 2, there were Retraining rules. Whenever you leveled-up, you could: * change your choice of Ranger combat style or Cleric domain or other class feature * change your feats * change your skills * change your languages There was then another section for Rebuilding rules, which represented more drastic measures: * you could reallocate your ability scores * you could change your class levels * you could change your race * you could change templates applied to your character The rebuild was supposed to take the form of a "quest" that the party would take part in, but it was at least possible. In 4th Edition, Retraining was available from get go: page 28 of the PHB 1. With every level-up, you could change a feat, change a power, or change a trained skill. When we get to 5th Edition, you can ... learn a new language or a new tool proficiency after training for 250 days at the cost of 1 GP per day.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2017 15:48
|
|
|
TBH I'm glad they didn't put rules like that in the manual. The best rule is "if you'd like to respec or replace your character, ask your DM" and that's basically what 5e has. This way DMs aren't pressured to allow or disallow respecs, or pressured to take away player resources if they do choose to allow a respec. Also the 3ePHB2 quest thing was really dumb and represents all the worst parts of the verisimilitude paradigm. Adventurer's league allows respecs before level 5 but none after, which seems reasonable for that type of game
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2017 16:02
|
|
|
esquilax posted:TBH I'm glad they didn't put rules like that in the manual. The best rule is "if you'd like to respec or replace your character, ask your DM" and that's basically what 5e has. Does 5e say or allude to this? This is not a gotcha question, I'd be honestly glad to be corrected on this, because the problem with it not saying anything (as opposed to 3e's mechanistic method) means that people trend more towards never thinking that respecs should be an option because of the "real reality, not a video game" mentality.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2017 16:06
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Does 5e say or allude to this? This is not a gotcha question, I'd be honestly glad to be corrected on this, because the problem with it not saying anything (as opposed to 3e's mechanistic method) means that people trend more towards never thinking that respecs should be an option because of the "real reality, not a video game" mentality. Probably not, but just like with "tying knots" the absence of a rule implies DM fiat. Like all "there are no rules for this, ask your DM" rules, the rule would be pretty redundant. There's probably a sage advice tweet out there saying that retraining is up to the DM if that counts
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2017 16:24
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Does 5e say or allude to this? This is not a gotcha question, I'd be honestly glad to be corrected on this, because the problem with it not saying anything (as opposed to 3e's mechanistic method) means that people trend more towards never thinking that respecs should be an option because of the "real reality, not a video game" mentality. I'm pretty sure that's an official AL rule, but I don't think it appears in any of the books.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2017 16:40
|
|
|
5e: Ask your DM. Which isnt annoying in and of itself but its really incosistently applied in 5e.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2017 16:41
|
|
|
Jimmeeee posted:I'm pretty sure that's an official AL rule, but I don't think it appears in any of the books. Yeah, there's an AL rule that you can respec rather freely below level 3 (or was it 5?) in AL, but that really doesn't help all the other home games out there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2017 16:46
|
|
|
Jimmeeee posted:I'm pretty sure that's an official AL rule, but I don't think it appears in any of the books. AL allows literal full "everything but your name" respecs before level 5 but none after as a compromise, because they are trying to create the kind of structured play where everyone starts at level 1 and "earns" everything. It's not my thing but it's a valid way to play.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2017 16:49
|
|
|
What Mystic disciplines do you guys think need to be houseruled or prohibited between now and when the Mystic gets some more rebalancing and/or officially released? We just did a conversion from Pathfinder to 5e and everything was going okay until the Mystic used their first Psychic Blast and apparently a Cone of Cold at level 7 that uses a very non-resisted damage type and targets a very rare saving throw (Int) seemed like a good idea at the time to someone at WotC.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2017 17:51
|
|
|
Reik posted:What Mystic disciplines do you guys think need to be houseruled or prohibited between now and when the Mystic gets some more rebalancing and/or officially released? We just did a conversion from Pathfinder to 5e and everything was going okay until the Mystic used their first Psychic Blast and apparently a Cone of Cold at level 7 that uses a very non-resisted damage type and targets a very rare saving throw (Int) seemed like a good idea at the time to someone at WotC. It's hard to say what's unbalanced when the Wizard, Sorlock, and Sorladin are in the game, but I think Mystics are supposed to have the potential for better blasting in return for having a much smaller variety of things they can do.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2017 17:59
|
|
|
Nickoten posted:It's hard to say what's unbalanced when the Wizard, Sorlock, and Sorladin are in the game, but I think Mystics are supposed to have the potential for better blasting in return for having a much smaller variety of things they can do. At level 7 an Order of the Awakened Mystic is going to have 6 disciplines, which have 3-4 powers each. If they pick Psychic Assault and Psionic Restoration as 2 of those 6 they have access to all the blasting they need as well as "Cure Wounds minus spellcasting ability bonus", Lesser Restoration, Revivify, and Restoration.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2017 18:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 21:00 |
|
|
Reik posted:At level 7 an Order of the Awakened Mystic is going to have 6 disciplines, which have 3-4 powers each. If they pick Psychic Assault and Psionic Restoration as 2 of those 6 they have access to all the blasting they need as well as "Cure Wounds minus spellcasting ability bonus", Lesser Restoration, Revivify, and Restoration. They also have to take entire disciplines to get things like Mage Armor or Smite, though, which I think ostensibly is supposed to make the discipline choices harder. For example, of the Cleric stuff they get from Psionic Restoration, I think Revivify and Greater Restoration are the ones I'd actually want to take as a Bard or prepare as a Cleric (I'd always take Healing Word over Cure Wounds, plus Prayer of Healing). But I'm stuck with getting Lesser Restoration and Cure Wounds as well. Note, I'm not saying this actually does balance that, but rather that I think that's how it's supposed to work.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2017 19:20
|
|