|
AnEdgelord posted:So I just got Xanathar's guide today and have been reading some of the warlock options and I have what is probably a very stupid question. You don't actually receive the weapon, it's just your Patron. You basically signed a contract with Evil Excalibur and now you kick rear end with swords in general, but at no point will Evil Excalibur appear before you and let you wield it. Edit: It's really like every other Patron in this respect. You may select Great Old One for your Patron, but you don't get to call forth Cthulhu and boss it around.
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 01:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 06:08 |
|
|
Sage Genesis posted:You don't actually receive the weapon, it's just your Patron. You basically signed a contract with Evil Excalibur and now you kick rear end with swords in general, but at no point will Evil Excalibur appear before you and let you wield it. Yeah, this basically. Your patron is some really powerful sentient magic weapon that's just lying around somewhere, probably in a different plane of existence. Like any other patron, it just gives you powers, but it's not actually traveling with you or anything. Of course, you can refluff however you want, but that's the default.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 01:41
|
|
|
Sage Genesis posted:You don't actually receive the weapon, it's just your Patron. You basically signed a contract with Evil Excalibur and now you kick rear end with swords in general, but at no point will Evil Excalibur appear before you and let you wield it. Ok I guess, but then i'm questioning why they went with a blade in the first place and didn't just let me sign a pact with the Raven Queen directly. Seems like both a missed opportunity and an unnecessary hurdle.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 01:42
|
|
|
AnEdgelord posted:Seems like both a missed opportunity and an unnecessary hurdle. That’s actually extremely 5e.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 01:46
|
|
|
Kaysette posted:That’s actually extremely 5e. Quoted for truth.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 02:30
|
|
|
I still can’t believe they made a pact version of Dril’s Betsy Ross Museum tweet. “Buddy, they won’t even let me wield it.”
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 03:28
|
|
|
evenworse username posted:For a potential one-shot session I'm thinking of doing a Monk as a change of pace from the Druid I play in our ongoing session. The idea of a Kensei monk who uses a bow primarily seems like a rad idea to me (especially if I can sell the DM on letting me use the bow for Agile Parry. I mean, if Stephen Amell can do it) but how disappointing am I likely to find this in practice? Speaking of this, someone should make a (magic?) longbow that doubles as a quarterstaff.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 03:33
|
|
|
The fluff is strange and mostly nonsensical because the entire thing was a bandaid for melee warlocks to begin with, and the 5e writers are extremely, extremely bad at writing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 03:59
|
|
|
AnEdgelord posted:Seems like both a missed opportunity and an unnecessary hurdle. Petition for new thread title.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 04:46
|
|
|
koreban posted:I’m not a complete 5e apologist. Hahahahaha motherfucker you went the full-on, "You don't understand what Our Prophet Crawford has said about this impeccable text," route. You can't honestly walk things back from there, man. You are 10000000% a 5E apologist, own that poo poo if you're going to admit that it's a thing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 04:48
|
|
|
I will also say that it's utterly ridiculous - and also peak D&D at the same time - for D&D to 'allow' you to swear yourself to the concept of a weapon without ever being able to wield that particular weapon. Not even a facsimile of it unless you take it upon yourself to do that! Just.... you swear yourself to this one particular idea of a weapon but somehow are also completely free to never actually learn to use said weapon. Because this sapient weapon wants your worship (???) but also doesn't give a gently caress if you're just doing your own thing weapon-wise? Why do they actually exist as supposedly separate beings on the same level as "the very concept of fae" or "all demons, all of them" instead of tools of more powerful beings?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 05:11
|
|
|
Hexblade's fluff is terrible and I've never seen someone use the by-the-book version. It's always been refluffed with another kind of patron. Just how did it make it through as-is? The weapon that isn't your weapon gives you powers, but also the shadowfel because. . reasons.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 05:14
|
|
|
Darwinism posted:I will also say that it's utterly ridiculous - and also peak D&D at the same time - for D&D to 'allow' you to swear yourself to the concept of a weapon without ever being able to wield that particular weapon. Not even a facsimile of it unless you take it upon yourself to do that! Just.... you swear yourself to this one particular idea of a weapon but somehow are also completely free to never actually learn to use said weapon. Because this sapient weapon wants your worship (???) but also doesn't give a gently caress if you're just doing your own thing weapon-wise? Why do they actually exist as supposedly separate beings on the same level as "the very concept of fae" or "all demons, all of them" instead of tools of more powerful beings?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 07:12
|
|
|
FactsAreUseless posted:It's called polyweaponry and you clearly don't understand it. Hey I'm just asking to be part of the relationship if I pledge myself to a sword forever, if Blackrazor wants an open relationship they can have it just I want a li'l time to shave too
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 07:32
|
|
|
AnEdgelord posted:Ok I guess, but then i'm questioning why they went with a blade in the first place and didn't just let me sign a pact with the Raven Queen directly. Seems like both a missed opportunity and an unnecessary hurdle. I mean I am okay if they just provide mechanics and no fluff for this kind of thing. I chose to have my BladeLock be representative of the first balde ever made, the divider and seperator who cut life from death and made them different.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 08:55
|
|
|
Coaxmetal from Planescape Torment seems like the kind of being that should be empowering Hexblade Warlocks. (A huge metal golem, forged from weapons, locked in a siege tower, constantly labouring to make weapons with the purpose of unraveling the universe) Undead Hippo fucked around with this message at 09:15 on Oct 25, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 09:12
|
|
|
Undead Hippo posted:Coaxmetal from Planescape Torment seems like the kind of being that should be empowering Hexblade Warlocks. Anything that brings in more PS is a good thing to do. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 09:25
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:I mean I am okay if they just provide mechanics and no fluff for this kind of thing. Same on the first bit. My patron was a personification of the Curse Of Iron, a part of the fabric of reality that holds back the fair folk and, as a side effect, is responsible for all human wars that aren't because two of the wrong nobles fell in love. I like yours more.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 10:09
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Same on the first bit. That owns. Your idea, or your dm?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 10:11
|
|
|
evenworse username posted:For a potential one-shot session I'm thinking of doing a Monk as a change of pace from the Druid I play in our ongoing session. The idea of a Kensei monk who uses a bow primarily seems like a rad idea to me (especially if I can sell the DM on letting me use the bow for Agile Parry. I mean, if Stephen Amell can do it) but how disappointing am I likely to find this in practice? At Level 6 a Kensei Monk is pretty drat good as-is. I've been playing one to some incredible fun for a few months now. Went Longsword and Longbow and yes when necessary I provide a decent ranged offense. On the flip side our DM let us all start with feats, minus a few certain ones, and I went with Mobile. It's silly-good. As for the thing about Deft Strike, I wouldn't say it is entirely useless but it is true you maybe don't want to use it willy-nilly. I tend to pump one out on crits, which end up being extra fun since I'm a Half-Orc. My DM has actually made the first addition to the magical weapon I've been using revolve around critical hits actually. Limited by my WIS mod for uses, per short rest, I can make all subsequent attacks after crit on a 19-20 for that target.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 10:15
|
|
|
dreadmojo posted:That owns. Your idea, or your dm? Mine. We did collaborative setting building, and from memory this one was a play off other players contributions like "we're super big deal personalities in the world", "there are no good guy elves", "I'm gonna be the avatar of star-crossed lovers", and 'oh yeah awesome we should all be curses." Actual game only lasted like 4 sessions and kinda sucked though. I don't think that DM had the chops to pull off the level of improv they wanted to, which was a shame because with either of my regular DMs those concepts would have gone good places. E: nearly all my rpg "ideas" are slight elaborarions on other, far cleverer people's good ideas - in other words, they're stolen. This one stole Pratchett's idea of elves, specifically from "Lords and Ladies", the vibe of the Turisas song "cursed be iron" or whatever it is, and a fellow player's idea of being the avatar of strife caused by star-crossed lovers. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 10:36 on Oct 25, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 10:29
|
|
|
I am playing in a series of one shots that will take us from level 1 to level 10. We have access to the PHB and Zanathar's. What can people recommend as a fun/weird build? So far I'm looking Half Elf Bard 1/Hexblade Warlock 1/Paladin 2/ College of Swords Bard 6 critfisher. Elven accuracy and swing two weapons for three attacks that crit on a 19-20 with targets of Hexblade Cruse. Dump smite into enemies when I hit. I'm also looking Crossbow Caster Blaster Human Fighter 2/Bladesinger Wizard or Valor Bard 8. Take sharpshooter at character creation, crossbow expert at 4. Get 3 attacks with 3d6 + 12 dex + 30 sharpshooter power attack. When I hit caster 8 take Greater Invisibility to just get advantage for an entire fight. Any other recommendations?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 11:12
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Mine. it's strong, i love the wars not caused by lovers bit. I found a playlist for my halloween death frost doom one shot and it is kind of amazing
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 11:44
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:E: nearly all my rpg "ideas" are slight elaborarions on other, far cleverer people's good ideas - in other words, they're stolen. This one stole Pratchett's idea of elves, specifically from "Lords and Ladies", the vibe of the Turisas song "cursed be iron" or whatever it is, and a fellow player's idea of being the avatar of strife caused by star-crossed lovers. Remixing elements of other fiction is great. It gives you a sort of short-hand foundational reference point to improv off of. Once you’ve mixed 2-3 elements together and applied a coat of D&D Fantasyland (or whatever setting) paint, it’s not an obvious ripoff, and pretty quickly over time it will become its own thing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 13:14
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:We did collaborative setting building, and from memory this one was a play off other players contributions like "we're super big deal personalities in the world", "there are no good guy elves", "I'm gonna be the avatar of star-crossed lovers", and 'oh yeah awesome we should all be curses." That's good stuff. This is something I'd like to try with our group sometime, is there some kind of system you've used or is it just developed out of how your group plays together?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 13:26
|
|
|
I always assumed hexblades wielded their patron or an aspect of their patron or something, but that's probably just because that's how all the hex blades ive seen are played
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 13:48
|
|
|
Farg posted:I always assumed hexblades wielded their patron or an aspect of their patron or something, but that's probably just because that's how all the hex blades ive seen are played It’s also funny because the original hexblade fluff from 3.5 is just “here’s a cool gish class” without any of the sword worship: http://therafimrpg.wikidot.com/hexblade They ended up giving the shadow pup to sorcerers then created the dumb sword fetish to shoehorn the rest into a warlock patron. Kaysette fucked around with this message at 14:00 on Oct 25, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 13:58
|
|
|
Kaysette posted:It’s also funny because the original hexblade fluff from 3.5 is just “here’s a cool gish class” without any of the sword worship: Man this is weird in a different way, hexblades have powers of some sort that manifested at some point, and they are dicks maybe the weirdness is from trying to reconcile "you have a magic sword that gives you special powers" and "finding new magic weapons".
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 14:03
|
|
|
D&D has kinda sorta had this long-running issue with "weapons you keep" because it pulls apart from the concept of "finding new weapons as loot". You have to do a bunch of "refluffing" to really pull off any sort of "signature weapon" or "artifact weapon" shenangigans. 3e had a splatbook that tried to do it and it was complete dogshit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 14:29
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:D&D has kinda sorta had this long-running issue with "weapons you keep" because it pulls apart from the concept of "finding new weapons as loot". You have to do a bunch of "refluffing" to really pull off any sort of "signature weapon" or "artifact weapon" shenangigans. a big part of that is how a +1 weapon has always been better in so many ways than a regular sword because of how many immunities/resistances it overcomes. so if you roll up to a new town to do some monster hunting, you dont have the van helsing shot of unloading the cart of all your cool specialty gear, you just have a guy slap the top of his pommel and say "yeah this bad boy kills anything". eliminating the raw +X weapon type and making overcoming resistances look more like how silvering weapons looks now - with a bunch of different categories for different types of monsters would mean when you find a new magic sword it might end up being a niche tool in your fighter's kit - would go a long way towards eliminating the "does it have a bigger + than my current sword" mindset ofc this is also kind of driven by monster blocks where like a ghost is statted up as both something that has a very strong lore reason for existing and a lore method to kill it and also as a CR4 baddie with 45 hp that punches for 17 damage that can be rolled on a random encounter table when you kick open a dungeon door. if a monster is narrative driven, there's opportunities to discover its weaknesses and its story and target those weaknesses. if it's random dice driven, it has to be able to be killed by Standard Issue Adventuring Gear
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 14:39
|
|
|
AnEdgelord posted:Ok I guess, but then i'm questioning why they went with a blade in the first place and didn't just let me sign a pact with the Raven Queen directly. Seems like both a missed opportunity and an unnecessary hurdle. I just nuke the patron, put hex warrior in as a pact feature, and make the invocations available with the pact. Haven't had any takers yet though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 15:23
|
|
|
Sion posted:I am playing in a series of one shots that will take us from level 1 to level 10. We have access to the PHB and Zanathar's. What can people recommend as a fun/weird build? Do you have access to SCAG?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 17:07
|
|
|
Had a pretty interesting turn of events last session. The party got into a fight with a group of humans, mostly statted up as berserkers, with 2 cultists and a gladiator. Fight was going pretty smoothly and there were just 2 berserkers and 2 cultists left. One of the cultists was very wounded and as a last ditch attempt to distract the party used a Command on the Aasimar Barbarian. The command she was given was "Betray." The way she went about it was attacking the person she respected the most, the Tiefling Paladin. This paladin was also wielding a great sword of vengeance. If it wasn't for a combination of her rage resistance and her racial resistance she would absolutely have gone down, but she was able to split and the paladin was restrained long enough for the curse to wear off. The party tried to get the sword away but he wasn't having it so the Trickster Rogue used a Charm Person spell to get it into the bag of holding. As it stands I'm treating the sheer distance of the sword being in essentially a demiplane as enough to keep the paladin uninfluenced. If he does try to take something from the bag of holding, however, the first thing he's grabbing is the sword.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 19:30
|
|
|
In a game that has always been about "get better, find better stuff, get better again" the idea of keeping the rusty fork you started with is a singular conceit that will only work if the dm is willing to work around your very specific desire.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 20:12
|
|
|
Thanks for the Monk advice, everyone. It turns out this one-shot is also going to be 1st ed. AD&D (!!!) so, uh, calculations have changed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 20:17
|
|
|
evenworse username posted:Thanks for the Monk advice, everyone. It turns out this one-shot is also going to be 1st ed. AD&D (!!!) so, uh, calculations have changed. Thieves level ridiculously fast in 1st ed if you want to be a higher level #justAD&Dstuff
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 20:20
|
|
|
dreadmojo posted:Thieves level ridiculously fast in 1st ed if you want to be a higher level #justAD&Dstuff Is 1st ED the one where you max CHA so you can have the most Mans-at-Arms to do all your fighting for you?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 20:44
|
|
|
Given the fact Intelligent weapons are infamous for loving players over on a whim? I can see where the idea of a Warlock patron being "An even BIGGER intelligent weapon" would come from. I wonder what it is about it being a metaphysical weapon makes some people stop and say "Whoa, TOO FAR!"? While I hate the frequency of "No, no, it's ROLEPLAY if you are literally the only spellcaster I gently caress with!" for Warlocks, I know I would find it all the more endearing if there was a circle of magic knives and hammers plotting against eachother with all the pretentiousness of the average Archfey or abyssal court. "No no, it's cunning when I, Lord of the winter's snow do it! " "I think I'll stick with my Patron" "He's a sword wearing a cravat! He makes you WIELD a sword wearing a Cravat!" "But it's a nice sword." Section Z fucked around with this message at 22:04 on Oct 25, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 21:53
|
|
|
clusterfuck posted:That's good stuff. This is something I'd like to try with our group sometime, is there some kind of system you've used or is it just developed out of how your group plays together? It didn't work great for that group, but they're not mt regulars. The way we'd do it is before session 0, the GM brings a Big Idea and a theme/vibe. So like "It's a bleak dying world but think more points-of-light than Mad Max. PCs should be medium-to-big deals." Session 0 everyone brings a handful of Big Ideas in theme, and we try to mash some of them together until we get something everyone likes. Stuff like "PCs are deposed royalty" or "The dwarves haven't surfaced for years". When you put these things on the table, it's understood that you're not providing minor fluff, you're saying "I want this to be a focus". Then we do characters together. Reskins are very common. Mechanics and fiction get separated hard while this is going on - The Last Dwarf On The Surface, 99820555 Bellows 1c B35 West (Bel to his friends), is a paladin mechanically, but his powers etc are from the Bellows 1c part of his name - he's the third son of The Bellows ("duke" would be the human equivalent of his dad's rank). There's an agreement that if you've done something like that, then both Dwarf and Paladin are off the menu for others, unless you want to be friends and link your fiction. There's also an expectation that if you "claim" dwarfs like that, then you're prepared to fill in related setting details as we play. Then the GM does a detail-light first session, players add details during play, and gradually a setting takes shape. But it's not like a Realms looking setting where every detail is explicit and 2000 years ago this exact thing happened and these were their names and 3-novel stories , it's more like say Dune where a vast amount of stuff is briefly referenced but intentionally left unexplored. Eg) What are the other dwarf noble ranks? hosed if I know, but if we need another one we can just pick a forge related word, put it in the format, and it's in theme. This is the grave of the dwarf hero 00000216 Hammer 1 A3 North. Eg) Two sessions later the GM notices the dwarfs' numbers and decides that they've sealed their mines to work on their version of the Y2K problem. Nobody knows exactly what will happen when the number of dwarfs ever alive surpasses 99999999, but 91208233 SPECIAL 1a B96 East ("Speccy") thinks it might mean the start of reincthonation. Edit: and it's really not planned out in a meaningful way. I pulled everything in this post out of my rear end while I drank my morning coffee. The first example follows on (to me) fairly obviously from the little bit of detail I made up about dwarfs (ie, that the pc is the Last One Up Here and the name format). The second example follows on from the first. I don't know the name of the king of the dwarfs, or even if they have gods. I don't know for sure what the "f27 south" part of the name is but I bet it's like "...of laketown" for humans. I don't even know for sure that legendary dwarf heroes will get reborn (re-mined? Refined?). I mean, that's pretty cool but it could also be some kind of "fatal exception reboot universe" deal, or it could mean the end of this naming convention and thus a massive societal change, or I bet another player comes up with something even better. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 22:37 on Oct 25, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 22:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 06:08 |
|
|
AlphaDog posted:It didn't work great for that group, but they're not mt regulars. Fantastic detailed answer, thanks! Our campaign (of mainly new players) has homebrew meta plot also containing a mishmash of things... either elaborated from the players backstory (which was our session 0 giving characters a home and plot hooks), or that I researched as DM as well as Out of the Abyss, which I liked the look of. I know it’s messy but it’s the first campaign for us so we’re trying lots of things and everyone’s having fun. Pretty standard home game messy fun I imagine. There’s still scope in our campaign for players to contribute more to their backstory (maybe part of a quest reward) and so also feel more invested in the world. Also creating narrative leverage for events due to OotA. I do know some players are better at offering creative input than others and I don’t want them to feel steamrolled or sidelined by the other players. I don’t know if you’ve any thoughts / experiences managing that kind of mismatch but thanks for the very helpful description. clusterfuck fucked around with this message at 23:47 on Oct 25, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 23:43
|
|