|
On the one hand I would like to have the Artificer updated so it can be put into the Wayfinder's Guide to Eberron so if I manage to play the Eberron AL stuff I could try it out, on the other hand I doubt it will be nearly as good as this Revised Artificer someone made. Seriously it has something like 7 subclasses that seem like they would all play relatively differently, and would make it so someone could run an all Artificer group, an Artificer's Guild if you will, where each character could have a different subclass.
|
# ¿ Sep 11, 2018 00:49 |
|
|
# ¿ May 14, 2024 19:49 |
|
clusterfuck posted:Looks interesting but holy poo poo that layout is broken - get the dark illustrations away from the text on page 1 and the table on page 2 is completely hosed. I download the PDF and it's worse. Like to read it but is there a version of this with a not broken layout somewhere? Hmm not sure what you are talking about, but it does sound like some people have issues with the GMBinder site. Here is a PDF version. Hopefully it won't have those issues for you.
|
# ¿ Sep 11, 2018 05:33 |
|
Yeah that isn't how it looked on my computer, but like I said it seems some other people have had that problem, which is why there is a google drive link to the PDF. Not sure if it is dependent on the browser one is using or what.
|
# ¿ Sep 11, 2018 05:40 |
|
More importantly it is +1 spell, that you can hand off to someone else to activate. It is fairly similar to what the UA Artificer had.
|
# ¿ Sep 11, 2018 10:00 |
|
I am actually surprised at Perkins, I thought he was better than most of the people at WotC. Perhaps 5e doesn't have such an item, but there were Smoked Glasses in previous editions that negated the Sunlight Sensitivity. Which suggests that it was not an allergic reaction at all.
|
# ¿ Sep 11, 2018 21:22 |
|
I'm sorry but building it back up from its most profitable time? What? The only reason 5e might be more profitable is because they aren't spending money on actually making any product, and they lucked out on the streaming boom brought about by groups like Critical Roll. Some people seem to have this weird misconception that 4e was a "failure" because it was unprofitable or unpopular. No 4e "failed" because any game that didn't get height of World of Warcraft numbers would have failed the insane goals that were set for 4e. Also did you miss the part where they asked if you were in favor of making races/classes suck to discourage players from playing them. Because if that is indeed what the developers did then that is straight up terrible and should be punished.
|
# ¿ Sep 12, 2018 23:19 |
|
Mendrian posted:Okay I warned you. This seems fine, perhaps even thematic. Only question is do you have to take damage to your real hit points, or would taking damage to your temporary hit points trigger the gaining Cha modifier temp hp? For comparison the Immortal Mystic, from the Mystic UA v3, gets Int modifier temp hp at the start of each of their turns. quote:Armor of Blood Interesting, on the one hand a +2 bonus to AC is pretty good, on the other hand Warlock AC is generally kind of bad so they could use the help. quote:My Blood Speaks Bad. Bad. Bad. In the hands of a Wizard being able to change the damage type of their spells frequently might be overpowered. But converting damage to Poison, or to a lesser degree Necrotic, is hardly gamebreaking. This should be available much more frequently, personally I would make it at will. If you really want to reign it in then have it require spending a bonus action before casting your spell. quote:Blood Grasp Now this might be a bit much for at will. If you are going to restrict anything to 1/Rest then it would be this. Although I am not sure that even it would really need that restriction. quote:Sanguine Recall Interesting, and thematic for what you seem to be going for. quote:Master of Blood And this could get out of hand if you did take my suggestions and removed restrictions on My Blood Speaks and Blood Grasp, though if My Blood Speaks is at will and Blood Grasp is limited to once a rest, maybe slightly more frequently at higher levels, it would still be reasonable.
|
# ¿ Sep 14, 2018 20:57 |
|
Okay Monks.... There has been some confusion and wrong beliefs about 5e Monks, though some of it has been corrected by other people. No Monk's don't get an ability modifier to off hand attacks made as a bonus action. But most Bonus Action attacks are not off-hand from Dual Wielding. Many Bonus Action attacks don't have that restriction. Polearm Momentum's 1d4 bonus action attack adds the stat modifier, the bonus action attack from Great Weapon Mastery on a crit or kill adds the stat modifier, the bonus action attack from Monk's Martial Arts or bonus action attacks from Flurry of Blows adds the stat modifier. When a Monk attacks with a Monk Weapon they can use their Dexterity for attack and damage, and they can use their Martial Arts damage die if it is better than the weapon, this last will almost never happen until the Monk's unarmed damage goes up to d8 or d10. The bonus action attack from Martial Arts, or bonus action attacks from Flurry of Blows, must be made with an unarmed strike and not with just any Monk Weapon. During the playtest the Monk changed a lot, but the most recent part that happened before the final release the Monk unarmed damage was higher. It started at 1d6 and scaled to 1d12. Which wasn't great but was better than it is now. Before 4e Monks unarmed damage started low but scaled to the point it did a lot more than any, nonmagical, weapon. They also got more attacks when fighting unarmed to the point they got more attacks than any other class. That said their attacks didn't have any of those various magical bonuses magic weapons could get.
|
# ¿ Sep 19, 2018 19:02 |
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:The standard offhand unarmed strike that all characters have does not get the modifier. The monk martial arts one does. Actually that never comes up. Because Unarmed Strikes are not Light Weapons and cannot be "wielded" in the off hand and you can't two weapon fighting with them. The Monk's Martial Arts/Flurry of Blows thing is kind of like off-hand attacks but not so it doesn't matter. For non Monks, or anyone else who doesn't somehow have a special Unarmed Strike, an Unarmed Strike is an attack that does 1 damage with no traits, it does add Str mod normally but you can't two weapon fight with it, it doesn't count as a 2-handed weapon for things that require that, cannot be used with Dex, etc. Tavern Brawler changes it to 1d4+Str, but doesn't let you two weapon fight with it. There might be some race options that give a natural/unarmed strike that might be light and thus usable with two-weapon fighting, and if there is then in that situation it would not add the stat modifier to the bonus action off hand strike. But yes I agree that Monks should have started out at 1d6 unarmed damage, or at least something better than 1d4. That said daggers are 1d4, as are darts, and some characters might use those, though most of those classes would probably be better off with a shortsword and some actual ranged weapon.
|
# ¿ Sep 19, 2018 20:05 |
|
Sadly in 5e you cannot actually rip out the throat of another werewolf with your claws or jaws. Unless someone cast a spell on you. Because for some reason 5e did not set it up so that things with Resistance or Immunity to weapons that aren't magical or made from a certain metal can't overcome similar Resistance/Immunity. So werewolves cannot harm each other unless they come across a magical or silver weapon. I believe this actually becomes an issue in the Ravenloft adventure.
|
# ¿ Sep 28, 2018 23:43 |
|
A quick glance through it and it absolutely does not do what I wanted the Warlock to do, but that was obvious as soon as I saw that they had spells.
|
# ¿ Oct 9, 2018 20:36 |
|
Finster Dexter posted:Well, what if we just give spells to everybody? ... not sure why you reacted this way. 4e was great, it improved a lot of things, wasn't perfect but what is? That said everybody DIDN'T have spells in 4e, and it was grognards who thought they did. Just like it was grognards who thought they all played the same, when they didn't. That said I didn't really like the way 4e did the Warlock, and the less said about the 4e Binder the better, but the 4e Warlock did work within the system. 5e is not 4e, most emphatically as they kind of overreacted to the 4e bashers and grognards. And I personally would have liked it if the 5e Warlock was closer to the 3.5 Warlock rather than what we got. More Invocation focused with Eldritch Blast not being a cantrip but an actual class feature that scaled by Warlock level. With invocations that let one change their style to melee, or aoe, with Invocations that were basically at will spells with some changes made to them, like in 3.5. In the playtest, during the very brief window when the Warlock was available, the Warlock didn't get spells, but instead had Invocations/Boons. Now most of these were sadly not at will, but they only revealed a small handful and the class only went up to level 5 at the time. That was potentially a lot more interesting than what we got, even if the final Warlock at least had the short rest recharge slots to differentiate from the other casters. Not that it works all that well in practice. EDIT: On a completely separate note, but I didn't want to double post, the new Unearthed Arcana is finally up. ... More stuff from Wayfinders Guide to Eberron. The magic items this time. So buying the Wayfinders Guide to Eberron is becoming more and more pointless as everything is just getting doled out as UA with no changes. Very, very slowly at that. So still no new Artificer stuff, which is a pity as it was supposed to be released months ago, and it would have made sense to put it out before the Eberron AL stuff started. Ryuujin fucked around with this message at 08:22 on Oct 10, 2018 |
# ¿ Oct 10, 2018 08:06 |
|
Nitrousoxide posted:Then again, Nitrousoxide posted:You actually get everything I mentioned there regardless of which order you take the class level in. Class abilities you get regardless of whether you take the class level later. It's only the proficiencies that are inherrent to the base class that are limited by multiclassing into it. So I kind of skimmed this and ignored it the first time, it just seemed like some kind of bad opinions. But it was brought to my attention again and I actually read what you wrote. You are wrong. On nearly all points. 1) Yes a Cleric can get heavy armor or martial weapons with certain Domains. This can be useful for some builds. It is not crazy OP or Broken or anything. 2) Taking a level of Wizard can get you their spellbook and their cantrips. And? The spellbook is mostly garbage, but required to be a Wizard. It is outright worse than what most spellcasters get, in a way. Yes you can add spells to it. For a lot of time and a LOT of gold. For what benefit? 1 level is going to limit you to just 1st level spells, and you will still need to prepare them in a slot. Yes the feature can be useful if you have the time and the gold, and know what you are going to be facing that day, for a WIZARD. For a multiclass. No. You wasted a level and you should be ashamed. 3) ...A single level of Bard is not super useful. I notice you keep mentioning Cantrips like that is some crazy good thing. But the biggest issue here is that Bards do not get Jack of All Trades at 1st level. They need to be 2nd level for that, at which point it is not a single level dip. Also the real thing that makes Bard stand out as so good is their ability to take spells from other classes, which they don't get at all until 6th level at the earliest. 4) ... So you didn't mention it but a single level of Fighter can be useful for its Fighting Style. Not amazing or anything, but useful. But you somehow think that 3 levels, which is not a single level dip, would give you the Bear Totem ability of the BARBARIAN, and also Rage, and Barbarian Unarmored Defense which is a really bad AC setup, and most Barbarians would probably just use Medium Armor. So I am assuming you didn't mean that you get these features by taking 3 levels of Fighter. But I could be wrong. If you meant for fighting types, that is 3 freaking levels. That will rarely be worth it for most fighting types. 5) And finally most of those are not actually worth giving up an ASI or Feat. Certainly not by going hog wild multiclassing into multiple classes. And trust me I have been trying out weird multiclass build since very early on in the Playtest.
|
# ¿ Oct 16, 2018 04:36 |
|
No no it isn't. The Champion is terrible at what it is supposed to do. I have played Champions before and I have pretty much never had the expanded crit range actually matter. I either roll a 20 or roll 18 or below. At least on attack rolls with a Champion. But even if I did roll 19s more often it wouldn't matter. The Champion would be better on a class like Rogue or Paladin that get extra damage dice, or the Barbarian which gets at will Advantage as early as 2nd level and eventually adds extra damage dice on a Crit. Yes getting 4 attacks, eventually, increases the odds of rolling a single crit in a round. The other classes would still benefit from Champion more. Now the Brute? That actually did a decent job of what the Champion was supposed to be, was it great? No, but it was better than Champion and much closer to the Battle Master numbers. That said it doesn't sound like we are going to get an official version of Brute, and instead are more likely to get the exact opposite, a daily based fighter archetype.
|
# ¿ Oct 20, 2018 15:09 |
|
Giving all Fighters the Champion abilities could work. Or you could combine Champion and Brute, maybe double up on some of the stuff that both get. Hmm a hypothetical Champion Brute: pre:Brute Force Starting at 3rd level, you’re able to strike with your weapons with especially brutal force. Whenever you hit with a weapon that you’re proficient with and deal damage, the weapon’s damage increases by an amount based on your level in this class, as shown on the Brute Bonus Damage table. Brute Bonus Damage Fighter Level Damage Increase (or maybe even double the dice) 3rd 1d4 (2d4) 10th 1d6 (2d6) 16th 1d8 (2d8) 20th 1d10 (2d10) Improved Critical Beginning when you choose this archetype at 3rd level, your weapon attacks score a critical hit on a roll of 19 or 20. Brutish Durability Beginning at 7th level, your toughness allows you to shrug off assaults that would devastate others. Whenever you make a saving throw, roll 1d6 and add the die to your saving throw total. If applying this bonus to a death saving throw increases the total to 20 or higher, you gain the benefits of rolling a 20 on the d20. Remarkable Athlete Starting at 7th level, you can add half your proficiency bonus (round up) to any Strength, Dexterity, or Constitution check you make
|
# ¿ Oct 21, 2018 05:26 |
|
kidkissinger posted:Is the 5e artificer good? What 5e artificer? Do you mean the old one from a few years ago? That hasn't been updated, had some issues particularly with the Alchemist archetype being all or nothing on a save so they could potentially do 0 damage all day long if the DM rolls well, and some other issues that clearly needed ironing out. It wasn't great, but had an interesting concept. There was supposed to be a new UA for Artificer a few months ago, but it kept getting pushed back and as far as I know hasn't been released yet but is supposed to be added to Wayfinders Guide to Eberron when it gets put out. That said there is a great homebrew Revised Artificer here that is better than the old UA Artificer and is likely much better than whatever WotC will eventually put out. koreban posted:My anecdotal experience in the AL games in my area is that everyone learns to silver their weapons as early as possible. We have several aged grogs that play in AL around here that help to define the meta for people. They play ideal characters (not exactly min/maxed, but not RP-first), and theyre advice is always towards party cohesion and synergy over personal glory. My anecdotal experience in AL games in my area is that basically no one has ever silvered their weapon, and far to many of the official adventures, not just the little modules but the full on books, throw things that are immune, or at least resistant, to nonmagical weapons. Sometimes these could have been harmed by silver weapons, but sometimes they could not even if we had them. There are things that are immune to nonmagical weapons that are not adamantine, and until recently non magical adamantine weapons didn't exist at all. I personally have played far too many characters that come across something they can't hurt because they don't have a magic weapon, its why I often try and go toward things like Shillelagh, which gives a caster the ability to bypass this problem for themselves, or Blade Pact Warlock to give a caster a way to bypass this issue, or a Devotion Paladin that gives a partial caster a way to bypass this issue. Notice how I didn't list any non caster options to bypass this problem? The closest you get is Monks at 6th level.
|
# ¿ Oct 23, 2018 21:13 |
|
koreban posted:I feel you, and I think this may get at the heart of the issue at hand, so I'm going to propose a question: I would say that is absolutely the fault of the system. The base class itself doesn't necessarily have to have that ability, maybe, but even the Eldritch Knight archetype of the Fighter doesn't make their weapon magical when they do their very magical sounding Weapon Bond, that lets them bonus action summon the weapon to their hand, but specifically doesn't make the weapon magical at all. There is no Barbarian archetype that makes their weapon magical as they rage, no Rogue archetype that lets their weapon harm things immune to non magical weapons, etc. The closest any of them get are the spellcasting archetypes which can hopefully, maybe, pick up Magic Weapon and then hope they can keep the Concentration up. And that is absolutely something the Barbarian is not going to be able to do.
|
# ¿ Oct 23, 2018 21:40 |
|
koreban posted:Are you referring to the AL treasure token system? If not, where does it say not to give out magical weapons? If you're referring to the previous conversation about magical +1 weapons not being required to hit creatures, you're conflating the math with the narrative and assuming a logical step that no one took. Uh that is not how that works. Only magical weapons do full damage, it doesn't specify silver weapons at all so nothing special happens with silver weapon.
|
# ¿ Oct 23, 2018 21:51 |
|
I feel like 99% of people would say that the silver weapons don't work. Since the silver weapons don't work. But hey I could be wrong. I have also had DMs who let weapons do half damage to lycanthropes because they didn't realize they had immunity rather than resistance to nonmagical weapons. Also there are no where near 14 or 15 books, at least not done by WotC who have done what 1 maybe 2 since the initial 3. If that.
|
# ¿ Oct 23, 2018 22:25 |
|
The encounter was not randomly rolled, and the DM didn't change it to resistance on purpose, they just didn't realize just how dangerous lycanthropes are. Just like the desginers didn't realize that lycanthropes turning people into more lycanthropes and then neither side being able to hurt the other at all doesn't work well. You have a "huge" list of books, probably mostly adventures. But how many of them are actually written by WotC? Hint. Very few of them. In fact during 5e WotC has been infamous on not producing product, 3rd party companies have been making those adventure books, and setting books, with some oversight by WotC perhaps but still the vast majority of the work is done by other companies.
|
# ¿ Oct 23, 2018 22:40 |
|
Malpais Legate posted:Monk VS Barbarian Unarmored Defense is really just a matter of monks not getting armor as an alternative, and the stats it scales off of are the ones they want to spend ASIs on anyway. Yeah if Barbarian unarmored AC was Str+Con it would work, perhaps losing the ability to add a Shield because most Barbarians probably aren't using a Shield anyway and with that level 20 feature they can get better AC than a Monk anyway. If their AC was Str+Con. EDIT: Also did I miss it or was there no Unearthed Arcana for this month at all?
|
# ¿ Oct 31, 2018 08:20 |
|
Is the mistake that you aren't an Ancients Paladin for crazy anti-magic stuff at 7th level? I mean between a Paladin and a Celestial Warlock you might have enough healing. frajaq posted:hi Sadly there isn't actually a lot of new content beyond the PHB. A few subclasses in a book here or there, but very few, a number of new races in various books, absolutely no new official classes yet. Some feats in a book or two, and spells out the wazoo from multiple books because of course. That said if you are willing to allow homebrew or 3rd party you might get some more options. Like I am currently playing a Warforged Warsmith Artificer using the Revised Artificer homebrew someone put out, another character is playing another Artificer archetype and the two characters are rather different. It is a great class and probably a lot better than the official Artificer whenever that finally gets finalized. Speaking of Mearls has been claiming it would be coming out to another UA again soon, for months.
|
# ¿ Nov 1, 2018 06:29 |
|
quote:@JeremyECrawford So when asked about the Artificer apparently it is still in the works, but no mention of when we might actually see it.
|
# ¿ Nov 7, 2018 09:00 |
|
So the new UA is finally up, nothing that seems all that exciting to me, just Ship Rules
|
# ¿ Nov 12, 2018 23:38 |
|
All this talk of having a telekinetic weapon makes me think of this Revised Artificer class's Infusionsmith archetype. In my Friday night game someone is playing one, and soon will be level 5 where they get the floating weapon that can make attacks up to 30 feet away as part of the attack action, in addition to the 1 attack you might make with the weapon in your hand. Then at 15th level they can grab an upgrade to get a second floating weapon. Again the Revised Artificer is really nice, has that floating weapon archetype, an Iron Man archetype I am playing as a Warforged, an archetype where you get a Thundercannon, or Lightning Sword, an archetype with a warforged companion, an archetype to be Batman, etc.
|
# ¿ Nov 20, 2018 00:24 |
|
CubeTheory posted:Base speed of 40, doubled by haste, doubled by boots of speed Are you sure Haste and Boots of Speed stack? Even if they do stack that is only 480. Because you can only Dash twice at most, a regular move, a Dash as a Bonus action because of 2nd level Rogue, and Dashing as an Action normally. So if they actually do stack, which I am not sure of, that would at best be 54.5 mph. And you probably can't keep that up long without getting Exhausted. EDIT: Looking them up Boots of Speed also take a Bonus Action to activate and can only be used for up to 10 minutes per day. Ryuujin fucked around with this message at 09:47 on Nov 28, 2018 |
# ¿ Nov 28, 2018 09:41 |
|
Mearls doesn't think they stack, but that is Mearls. Also a better version of this includes level 18 Monk with Mobile as a feat, also Tabaxi for that 1 round extra doubling.
|
# ¿ Nov 28, 2018 10:15 |
|
Aniodia posted:To be honest, there's a lot of stuff in D&D that's worth exploring a lot more than what's already been done, in both established settings as well as just the implications that arise from the basic Players Handbook. To touch back on the Eberron talk, that's really one of the only settings that I can readily think of that acknowledges the fact that there are people who can shoot fire and fly around like it's nothing, there's more than one person who can do such feats (and these feats can even be taught to others as well!), and keeps extrapolating on that. Rather than the typical D&D world of Dirtfarmistan, where there might be a wizard out in the middle of bumfuck nowhere, and the closest people haven't decided to burn the witch, Eberron realizes that stuff like Continual Light lamp posts would not only exist, but would probably be fairly common, and the general public would not only be way more comfortable around magic, but (thanks to dragonmarks) may be capable of minor magic themselves without even putting in the time and effort that the actual wizards and artificers do. Kind of reminds me of the Dragaera books. Main character works as an Assassin, and does make use of some Magic though he isn't a major spellcaster by any means. Pretty much everyone that is a citizen of the Empire has access to some magic, and they don't really get fat or have scars or go prematurely bald, etc because of it. And their warfare has gone through phases because of Magic. As either attack spells or defense spells outstrip the other.
|
# ¿ Dec 6, 2018 07:10 |
|
Any news on the next Unearthed Arcana. Unless I am mistaken this is the second Monday of the month and should be the day Unearthed Arcana drops. Unless they slip again on actually releasing these dribbles on time.
|
# ¿ Dec 11, 2018 00:53 |
|
MonsterEnvy posted:Oh don't think anyone linked the new UA If nothing else it could be interesting for playing a sidekick instead of a normal character, playing a CR 1 or lower creature then adding some "class levels". When I saw it I had an idea that might be interesting. A party of heroes went around saving the world and what not and happened to gather a small group of sidekicks as they went around. Then the party of heroes disappears mysteriously, and someone needs to step up into their shoes. So the sidekicks go out and try to do their heroic best.
|
# ¿ Dec 19, 2018 08:30 |
|
Remember 5e and 3.x aren't actually any faster than 4e. Except when a spellcaster decides to simply end an encounter because they are broken powerful and have that option.
|
# ¿ Dec 21, 2018 09:31 |
|
No version warring can never produce interesting conversations. It is a blight. There is stuff wrong with every edition of D&D, and stuff that is good. But people keep claiming certain things are a problem with only a specific edition when it is a common problem.
|
# ¿ Dec 21, 2018 20:11 |
|
|
# ¿ May 14, 2024 19:49 |
|
Sage Genesis posted:Eh, I don't know about that. The important thing to remember is Paizo didn't copy it, they probably couldn't because it wasn't included in the open gaming content, and also they would probably have done a poor job of it. A third party company, who generally does rather good work, did it instead. Along with psychics, and various other late 3.5 stuff that never got a Pathfinder equivalent. Some people have even wanted them to try and continue Pathfinder in the same way that Paizo continued 3.5 by making Pathfinder, since some people are not happy about Pathfinder 2e. But speaking of Book of Nine Swords it shows that despite what people felt about 4e having at-will, encounter and daily powers that 3.5 had all of those as well before 4e came out. Daily powers obviously in the form of Rage and Spells, Wild Shape and any number of other things. At-will in the form of the Warlock and Reserve Feats that let a caster get an at-will minor spell like ability based off their spells prepared/known. And Encounter, more or less, in the form of Maneuvers from the Book of Nine Swords.
|
# ¿ Dec 21, 2018 23:05 |