/5eg/ Fifth Edition General:

zcvbcs

Definitely better at low levels where there's plenty of mundane damage happening and those few points count for more.

It is, it stays useful even in later levels because many of the high end monsters have plenty of multi attacks.

We have an enchanter in our group, it's pretty great when he can just use his action each turn to just completely take a powerful enemy out of the fight.

rtshjuk

Huh. Good to know, I'll do that then.

Hey /5eg/ I need help coming up with a character. Its the straight man in a buddy cop duo with the other guy being an loose cannon urban ranger(with dog companion).

The basic plot is that a super rare magical resource popped up in insane quantities in unclaimed territory. The area is next to impossible to conquer so many major powers in the world sent large contingents of people quickly forming a massive city with loads of money/racism flowing through it. Where we come in is we are employed by the church of this worlds god of law and order who set up a massive presence here to stop the city from imploding. The priests and paladins take care of the general peace(beat cops) but they hire specialists to deal with the more fucked up situations(detectives).

My original idea was just to be a cleric/paladin of the law god but that seems too easy, I want to try some character that might not be so obvious for a straight man. The other guys background has him as an exstreet rat with criminal connections so the gutter side of the city is taken care of, I was thinking someone who knows how to handle the fancier folk would be good.

Any suggestions would be great as I can't really find something that seems right.

Last one. Don't have too many edgelords, not fond of them.

oh no he broke his sword

I was 90% sure this was going to be another trick. Thank you to whoever compiled this.

Has does the All Players Make Rolls attacking and defense rolls variant actually work?
Please explain it to me as if I'm a retard.

>defense rolls
You roll 1d20+(AC - 10). The DC for this roll is the monster's attack bonus + 11. If you pass, the attack misses. If you fail, the attack hits. If you roll a 1, the attack is a critical hit. If you roll a 20, the attack is a guaranteed miss.

Example: you have an AC of 17, and a monster with a +4 to hit makes an attack against you. You roll 1d20+7 and have to get a 15 or higher to avoid the attack.

Attack rolls are not changed with this variant.

When monsters attack a player character, the monster's attack is not a roll, but a target number (their attack bonus plus eleven). The player rolls to defend--blocking, dodging, whatever--and their roll is 1d20+(their regular AC minus 10). If their roll defeats the monster's target number, they have defended and are safe from taking damage.

In the event that a regular non-variant monster attack would have advantage, the variant defense roll instead has disadvantage. The opposite is true: if normally a monster would have disadvantage, the PC's defense roll has advantage.

If a player crit-fails a defense roll, the damage behaves as though they took a critical hit. If for example a monster crits on 19-20, the crit-fail roll is 1-2.

This has the purpose of making players feel more involved. Instead of the feeling that they are just standing there waiting to get smacked on, they instead feel like they are taking a more active role in defending themselves.

That's defending against NPC attacks. Let me check whether or not there's other stuff the players get to roll with this variant rule.

Thanks, sounds good. As gimmicky as it feels I'm actually pretty excited about this character

Well you'll want int and wis for the detective RP, along with proficiency in investigation and perception and insight. The cleric thing could be a good idea, but you could write a criminal past into his backstory and make him trickery domain with the Charlatan background?

Two quick rules question:
One, does a creature with a multiattack explicitly only get two attacks - as in, two attempts to deal straight damage - or can a griffon, for example, make an attack and then an attack action such as a grapple?

Two, can a creature sio muktiattack attack, move, and then attack, or must the attacks be made in succession?

>attack, move, and then attack
Yes

There are also rules for the players rolling a monster's saving throws. If you're curious I can sum those up as well.

Personally, I think the "Players Make All Rolls," is pointless beyond the players rolling their own defenses. Frankly speaking, with the level of agency players feel is returned to them with the defense rolls, they will not care in the slightest that you are rolling the monster's saving throws.

>Making villain character
>"I'll roll stats, why not?"
>Decide to roll 3d6 because 4d6d1 is broken as fuck
>Get two 18's anyways
lmao

I bet you make him using PC classes and rules too, nigger

The multi-attack limits them to whatever the multi-attack says can happen.

As for attacking, moving, and continuing the attack: from what I understand that's something anyone can do. Just like anyone can attack and then move or move and then attack; whatever works for the narrative they have in mind.

Death domain cleric is explicitly a villain "PC" class

You say that like there's something wrong with it.

Warlock of a celestial or the undying light is a personal favourite of mine, I'm not sure how to tie that in with the nobles though. Maybe a mastermind rogue and play it as a courtier.

Noob GM here. How do I make a villain from the ground up stat wise? I'm planning on making an evil druid. Before all i did was steal from/ slightly modify things in the monster manual.

Depends on how you design the encounter. If he's by himself you could just build him as a player character in the druid class up to the level of the party, a party of 4 or more people would have no problems dealing with that. But if there's a lot of trash enemies around/circumstantial advantages it would be too powerful. You have to keep in mind that a PC build of equal level is too hard for a 1v1 fight with an actual player, but in a group vs that 1 PC build, the gank potential means the party will tear them apart anyway.

Make a druid PC. Give him an evil alignment and minions. Pick something awesome you want him to do and say he can do it.

Great Weapon Master and Polearm Master seem really good, worth taking? Although my Paladin has only 14 Strength, should I take 2 Strength or one of these?

>Great Weapon Master and Polearm Master seem really good, worth taking?
Are you new here?
>Although my Paladin has only 14 Strength
Are you REALLY new here?

Yes.

Sweet as, thanks heaps bros!

Make a druid character of the same level/1-2 levels higher than the party (depending on how many people), give him some minions and maybe some legendary resistance/legendary actions/lair actions.

These do seem fun but could potentially slow down combat.

In my experience it runs like everything in 5e run: quick if your players know what they're rolling, slow if otherwise.

A cheat sheet or cards, as with most things character-related, helps.

Am i only one who is bothered by the fact that monsters and PCs use different mechanics to build? When everyone use same mechanics, the world feels more real, more objective. If monsters are made differently, it feels bit theatrical, artificial. Like when you witness respawning monster in videogame.

Yes

No DM wants to spend like 4 hours making a single combat encounter. Monster rules are different for the sake of expediency.

I suppose, if that's what matters to you. It's a toolkit for telling a story. Sometimes the story is benefit by the foes using other mechanics.

But then, there's no much really stopped by you from making humanoid enemies the way PCs are made. Monsters? Yeah, that's a bit different and I get the frustration if you want pure mechanical consistency.

>use PC rules for creating villains
This creatres mechanically boring villains and makes the player characters feel less unique.

When a bear mauls a person, it doesn't break immersion in reality. People, even adventurers, aren't "built" the same as animals, let alone things like eldritch horrors, demons, and magical constructs.

>It's a toolkit for telling a story.
>DnD
If i wanted toolkit for telling a story, i'd probably use something much more narratively focused than DnD. I've got particular soft spot for Fate. DnD is great for fantasy battles on grid, but not so sure about its storytelling capabilities.

Good point.

You're not the only one who's bothered by it but that doesn't make such a stupid complaint any more valid.

>dnd lacks storytelling capabilities
5e does nothing to hinder storytelling. Yes, social encounters should be ran using roleplay and not rollplay, but that's pretty much its only limitation.
(Social skills should not be used in place of roleplaying, but to support roleplaying).

I'm fond of PbtA myself, but snide comments aside D&D is still a toolkit for telling a story together. In fact 5e is the best of them all for this so far; it's the most streamlined and narrative of the set.

I see lots of people say the storytelling is the soul focus and want the game streamlined more and more to make it less restrictive... But isn't the "game" aspect one of the main draws in and of itself? Many people get their kicks from the mechanics of the game, others get their kicks from pretending to be a dwarven noble who sold his soul for power. Most get their kicks from a combination of the two things.

>soul

sole*

All am i saying is just that if you prefer more story or more "game" than DnD offers, you should consider other games.
Mostly agree with what you're saying.

"Hey Satan I'll trade you this flatfish for the power of hell"

How would you do fantasy sportsball? Planning on having players compete in a coliseum but I want something more than just chariot races, gladiatorial battles, and jousting.

Well?

Volleyball with chainmail banana hammocks.

How does a character get blindsight? I hate my eyes and want rid of them

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_football

This, just on a pitch.

Or Royal/Real Tennis (the tennis episode of Slayers is fucking great)

Lifebloom - 1 bonus action, range touch. When you cast a spell, you may heal a target by 1d4-1 HP as a bonus action.

hahahaha

humie shitter detected

ELVIES GET OUT GET OUT GET OUT REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

forgot to mention, it's a cantrip

>tfw dark vision is handed out like candy to the speshul snoflake races

Sometimes I think even the 5e creators forgot that paladins don't have to worship a deity

>Oathbreaker atonement - the paladin must choose a deity and sacred oath

Warlock's invocation Devil's sight gives you ability to see in total fucking darkness.
Rogue 14 have blinsense - ability to hear hidden and invisible enemies in 10ft radius.
Some beasts have blindsense, so you could go druid and just wildshape all the time.

But probably best advice i can give you is to forget such stupid idea.

No. Cantrip that heals HP totally obsolete Hit Dice mechanics and makes short rests even more useless.

>Healing cantrips
No. Absolutely not

Yeah but what if it stipulates you can only use the cantrip as a bonus action when you cast a spell.
You could spend 4 lvl 1 ss to heal 4d4-4 HP
Not op imo

It's strictly a combat heal since it specifies having to cast a spell first. Throwing out a cantrip won't trigger it, so it isn't spammable,

exatly, I like it because you can heal a downed comrade without it taking your entire turn. Makes healers more fun to play.
BUT
1 extremely short range,
2 25% chance of not working
3 it costs you a cantrip space

Oh, i overlooked that, my fault.
Not sure whether it is useless enough to be a cantrip, but i guess it might work, then.

>I'm a paladin of an IDEAL
/r/atheism pls

This and racial abilities for creating things are my two biggest pet peeves for 5e's races. I'm not sure who thought the lizardman's Cunning Artisan was a good idea, it sounds like something anybody with the right know-how could do.

>Magic items are rare in 5e! Don't feel like you need to give your PC's specific items
>By the way here's a class that just shits out free bags of holding lul

With the failure chance, and it not being spammable I think it's fine for a cantrip slot. It will save the day one time over the course of a campaign and go completely forgotten for the rest of it because nobody will care about maybe healing 1-3 HP.

Those people can go play 3.P or 4e. They have their game-y games. It's time for streamlined and narrative D&D. We've put up with enough overly-complex bullshit and deserve it now.

Any news on Tomb pdf?

Not worth sacrificing a cantrip space in order to heal downed pcs without using your whole action? Throw a lightning bolt, throw on your shades and say "I guess I could heal you brah"

Would it be worth it to you as a 1d6-1?

Polearm

So how is the Three-Pillar XP UA in practice? Anyone tried that out? I've been thinking of using it since my table has expressed they want to go back to the old XP tracking instead of milestones for our sandbox.

the 1d4-1 is fine for what it wants to do, it's not for healing it's for getting people up. i think it's fine the way it is.

You don't "deserve" anything you entitled fuckwit.

/pfg/ is down the hall and to the left.

>grognards
Let's go with me using the wrong phrasing. Does that trigger you less?

It doesn't change the fact that WotC have made multiple game-y D&D games. Making at least one that's streamlined and narrative makes sense; opens up your audience.

You can get pissy about my specific words all you want but making another game-y D&D would have been the stupidest thing ever. So they didn't do it.

Well, that went from 0 to 100 fast. Why don't you be quiet and let adults talk, darling?

I literally have no problems running multiple games in a row with almost no combat or use of complex mechanics using 5e

Yes, that triggers me a lot less.

That was remarkably simple.

First of all, cantrips are spells too. (PHB 201)

Secondly, even if they weren't or you wrote something like "non-cantrip spell", there's still plenty of exploitable edge cases, and you'll never be able to do enough research to cover every conceivable angle in such a way that your players couldn't find an infinite or very plentiful healing source.

Hell, even as is, it turns practically every wand into a wand of cure light wounds.

Yes, it's a cute idea if you sorta turn your head and squint a bit, but no, it's not worth doing.

If what you want is a cantrip that gets people back on their feet, you're better off with something that allows people to regain 1 hit point if they have zero hit points, specifically. And even then, that still damages overall game balance in at least about a handful ways.

"When you cast a spell using a level 1 SS or higher"

A huge improvement, but it's still more trouble than it's worth.

Oh hey, my pics are here

Running a group and all 4 want to be pure illusionists.
What the fuck do I do?

>dinosaur zombies

another thing into my list of things i didn't realize i wanted my whole life

Explain why it's going to make for a shitty game.
TALK TO YOUR PLAYERS.

Anyone got some hot tips for a new DM? I got bamboozled into the role after showing up late and finding out everyone else made characters and no one wanted to DM

Is there a problem in being illusionists? Curious.