/5eg/ D&D Fifth Edition General

Player's Handbook is for players i.e. idiots who need bells and whistles. DMG is for DMs i.e. people with at least average intelligence

Yeah, only a total chad would read from light brown papers. A truly enlightened gentlesir like yourself reads from gray pages.

That doesn't answer the question at all you nerd.

The have different colors so that you can tell them apart a little more easily. The Monster Manual also has a little stain thing in the lower right corner, where the DMG has a colored triangle.

Why are 3.X players so adamant to turn to 3.X 2.0? This is literally Human Fighters, the edition.

They are soothed by repetition

Same reason they didn't like 4e, 2e players didn't like 3e, and 1e players don't like anything.

It's all inertia.

They're Grognards. There's always been a group of Dungeons and Dragons players who were satisfied with the previous edition's rules. From what I've heard, a large chunk of players stick with the rules they've grown up with. Since 3.X 2.0 is still 3.5 but with support, it doesn't surprise me they stick with it.

People with autism may develop obsessions for several reasons, including:

* obsessions may provide structure, order and predictability, and help people cope with the uncertainties of daily life

* people who find social interaction difficult might use their special interests as a way to start conversations and feel more self-assured in social situations

* obsessions may help people to relax and feel happy

* people can get a lot of enjoyment from learning about a particular subject or gathering together items of interest.

All i'm seeing in the MEGA link are black folder and file names, same thing a week ago... Am I retard?

*Blank

That's silly. If anything, insides of the books should be uniform with covers differiating them from eachother.
This is actually one thing that 4th edition handled well, with Core books, Supplements and everything else being color coded for the type of content they had. 3rd edition style of emulating actual fantasy book covers was cool, but 4th worked fine as well, maybe even better.

I like the actual content of 5E books, but cover/content design isn't that great. They are uniform now, yes, but in worst possible way. All the covers have exact same styling.

I don't think they would have had time to change it due to response to the phb, so I doubt it was that.
Maybe it's cheaper? Fewer people buy the dmg and mm compared to the phb, so it would make sense for them to save money on the books they know wont sell as well. That's just a guess, though. Could just be an art design choice.

Best feat for a blasty Light domain cleric? My DM is letting us use variant humans so I'm planning on using it. I was figuring warcaster but would spell sniper help me blast behind teammates with scorching ray without the cover thing messing up my aim?

tavern brawler

I don't disagree about having different cover designs, but I personally think 5e has much better interior art than previous editions. 4e was much too 'glossy' for my tastes—I want my fantasy art to look more like pic related.

And although the interior design is a bit less immediately readable than 4th edition, it also feels a lot warmer. And with the massive margins, it's certainly much less cluttered than 3rd.

So I'd normally cast mage armour when going somewhere dangerous so I only need to cast it once per day. When do you cast it when I'm in a place that is always dangerous(like the underdark or ravenloft)? Should I be using it twice a day? Should I only cast it when I go to a place that seems like it is going to be more dangerous?

So I'm multiclassing fighter1/roguex and planning on doing grappling in heavy armor. Which fighting style should I choose from Fighter? I'm thinking either Defense or Dueling.

>Defense: the benefit is obvious, I'm going to be in close proximity to bad guys during fights and the higher my AC, the better
>Dueling: gonna have one hand grappling the target anyways, so I can always take advantage of this; but is it worth it for a max of 4 extra damage per turn?

Also considering barbarian because rage grants advantage on strength (eg grapple contest) checks. But I guess since this particular character is an arcane trickster, that doesn't synergize very well (can't concentrate on spells while raging; I'm planning on grappling foes and holding them in a create bonfire while I stab them with sneak attack). I guess the better option considering this would be to go rogue1/barbarianx if you wanted to do a standard grappler with a bunch of attacks and whatnot.

The books wouldn't be the same without occasionally goofy art.

The stuff in PHB is mostly fine, I just miss the flavour descriptions of the weapons, and more in-depth looks at the Deities. Those seem like weird omitments.

>occasionally goofy art.
Goofy is not a strong enough word

Why do you need descriptions of the weapons when there are pictures?

I assume the bare-bones descriptions of deities is because they wanted to avoid having a single default pantheon and detailing multiple pantheon's worth of gods would have taken up too much room.

You know most of that image is from pathfinder, right?

Rogue isn't the best way to go for grappling. Other than expertise, there is no need to go into it. I'd probably go bard3/fighterx or fighter2/bardx

Yeah. Point?

I'm taking the Grappler feat for sneak attack damage and doing cool shit with Arcane Trickster spells (hopefully: like using the fly spell to drag a target up into the air 60 ft per turn with me pulling a sneak attack every turn and every 60 feet yielding 6d6 bludgeoning damage when dropped).

What do you think for fighting style? Defense or Duelist?

Pathfinder != WotC

I want to fuck that elf girl

>Pathfinder != WotC
No one is saying it does. I used the image because it has both of the somewhat goofy somewhat terrifying halflings in the 5e PHB. So again, what's your point?

>So again, what's your point?
Easy there, you aspergers-ridden fucking edgelord. I'm not even the guy you replied to in the first place.

WHAT'S YOUR POINT!??? HUH????

*teleports behind you*
*whispers*
"So again, what's your point?"
*stabs you with a katana*

Answer me you shits :-) Sanity check on if the mega is f'd up or if I need to do something to make the files visibl.

Are we doing a bit now? Are you the whore I'm trying to fuck?

Looks fine to me. I have the mega extension for Chrome installed, though.

It's working fine for me.

Defense. Just remember you aren't getting fly until level 15 and enlarge/reduce until level 9 if you are going with arcane trickster over bard

I for one am totally fine with the relatively sparse descriptions of deities. I use real-world pantheons, and those have been written up half a dozen different sourcebooks over D&D's lifespan. If I want to know more about gods, I'll go to wikipedia, not WotC.

The kinds of deities and creation stories that D&D designers are insanely tame compared to actual myths. Like Set murdering Osiris, tearing him into 14 pieces, and feeding his dick to a fish. Or Odin and his bros making the world from the corpse of a giant, who was suckled by a giant cow. Or a blue guy who cheats on his goddess wife with the wives of a bunch of cowherders.

Compare that to what WotC seems to think is good worldbuilding: a platinum dragon god, the Raven Queen, Asmodeus...

Yeah, I was thinking Defense is the better one. Duelist is only good if you get multiattack I figure. Even then, at level 20, the fighter only gets an extra 8 damage if all his attacks hit.

...

Also, why are you thinking about Enlarge/Reduce?

Being bigger means grappling bigger things

With your hand you just be normal. Withe everything else:

>They have pregen level 1 characters but also you can use standard array or point buy to create characters.

>bring your dice and, if you can, but a miniature of your character or something of the sort. Some players, like myself, have minis that you can borrow but you should try your best to be prepared.

The vanilla deity lore is kinda lame, but there's some nice stuff. Kurtulmak's and Kobolds' original creation story is delightfully stupid, too bad in later editions that was switched to more generic fantasy stuff.

But I agree, short explanations of the gods aren't that good, to do them justice you need to detail some exploits of theirs. Flavour is nice.

I just now noticed that lute-halfling has boobs. God damn, while reading the book I just figured it was a dude.

Pic related.
I love this story. Makes me want to play a kobold just so I can hate gnomes passionately in character as well.
...Come to think of it, with 4e's interpretations of gnomes as fey, wouldn't a dwarf-kobold unified kingdom be a good fit? They can bond over enjoying digging holes, breaking rocks, and insulting faerie fags.

I'm big on custom pantheons, but I try to take pointers from real-world myth.

One of the primary issues with the FR Pantheon is that there are many gods, but they individually behave in a monotheistic way. With a couple of noteable exceptions, they operate as infallible beings and have little petty rivalry.

Contrast this with historical polytheistic religions where the gods were squabbling assholes who regularly shit on mankind by accident (and, in some cases, were barely aware of mankind at all), it's little surprise that the result is so bland.

A couple of other settings do a bit better. Eberron's having fragmented religions is a bit better.

>Be god with Neutral Good pantheon
>Destroy a mine because your own people can't be assed to work
>Kill million members of a new race
>"It's just a prank, bro!"
Fuck Garl.

Martials are U S E F U L
but lack V A R I E D. G A M E P L A Y.

>Play a rogue for high sneak attack damage
>Realize I'm just there to make high skill checks and to do less than average damage

Rogues are the best martials. Both thief and arcane trickster have gameplay defining features at level three.

And this is what SCAG had to say on the matter.
Damned gnomes, trying to erase history.
Remember the Darastrixhurthi!

Yeah.

I've been trying to heavily rewrite the pantheons, although keeping them, in essence, with the same gods. Mostly so that they feel like pantheons on an internal level, and so that they feel like religions for actual people, not just for adventurers to call upon when they need to pray for a +1.

My current elf gods rewrite has bits of cree and welsh folklore as inspiration, with some medieval myths about the fey and tricksters thrown in. They're also meant to be an all-trickster pantheon.

That said; if I was going to ignore most of the planar shit, I'd probably stick to a cross between the 9 hells and the keys of solomon for a mythical fiend thing.

So I've heard that the warlock is limited and a pretty weak class, but it seems like it delivers a good balance of utility and damage to make it one of the more balanced classes. Am I missing something here?

The online RPG audience tends to zero in on combat utility and versatility. The popular perception is that Warlocks are very useful in combat, but only as a turret for Eldritch Blast.

This, like most things onna internet, is an oversimplification: Warlock can do lots of groovy shit, and is one of the better classes for sheer variety of out-of-the-box options. Invocations are sweet (with some very nifty at-will/once-per LR spells) and the chain and tome pact boons add some additional choices both in and out of combat. Your spell list and skills will give you lots of ability to influence creatures outside of combat, too.

Fuck, even the Blade pact Boon is fine. It's maybe not as versatile as the other two, but being able to draw a greataxe naked and having automatic proficiency with it is not bad in a hostage situation.

Nope. People are silly. 2 levels in warlock and a charisma modifier are literally all you need to be good at the game. Everything else the warlock offers is just gravy on top.

With a single invocation the warlock is equally good at skill-monkeying as a ranger and only comes second to Rogue and Bard. People are dumb and putting too much emphasis on spells and the short rests thing.

> Invocations are sweet (with some very nifty at-will/once-per LR spells)
You poor bastard, reread the spell invocations that aren't at will. They take your spell slot. I have never heard anyone sing their praises that knew this.

In away from the phb right now, but only some of them use spell slots. And the at will ones are almost always awesome.

> durrr, reed buk
> didn't read the book
Stay stupid, /5eg/.

I think the 1/longrest invocations aren't as bad as people seem to think. You get the spellslot back when you short rest, you can't use it to cast that specific spell again. People seem to think that you don't get the spell slot back for some reason.

>tfw still torn between 4 class/background combos
At this point my character is still vague enough that I could go either Feylock, Bard, Feyladin or Ranger with just the right background (Outlander for the first two, either Outlander or Entertainer for Paladin, Entertainer for Ranger).

How do people break the indecision?

Has the group met to discuss the sort of game you'll be playing?

What is the rest of the group playing?

What is the setting like?

What is least like something you've done before?

>Gameplay defining
>Throwing 50gp for 1d4 damage

Hey guys I made a thing

All of them that aren't at will except for the lvl 15 pact of the chains special ability "Chains of Carceri" use a spell slot. And that one isn't even the full spell, they toned it down and it can only hit outsiders with that ability.

Some are still worth it. The slow one for instance. And all the at wills are fine.

Seems fun, kind of what I wanted when I was playing a monk but it felt lacking as far a just pure unarmed went.

Definitely showing this to a friend who wants to run a barbarian.

I'd probably give them something like 'Powerful Blows' at 6th that let them ignore resistance and immunity to non magical weapons

>Has the group met
Not the full group.

>What is the rest of the group playing
Rogue, Barbarian, Cleric

>Setting like
Bog-standard FR afaik

>Least like something you've done before
They're all things I've done before, but my last pc was a Thief.

> level 6 feature is literally open hand technique
Fine, I guess, but shouldn't it be StrMod? Also what said.

>Rogue, Barbarian, Cleric
I'd go with the Feylock, but the questions were more things to ask yourself.

After "what interests me the most," those are the questions I ask.

Healing kits on a bonus action, ball bearings everywhere, alchemist fire, etc.

What's a good way to do dice-rolling in Discord? All the AI dicebots I've tried will take an input of 12d6 and produce 3,3,3,3,4,4,4,4,5,5,5,5

I've heard claims that FR's gods used to be formed into several competing pantheons, but that the structure got scrapped over time (and over multiple bad comic-style crises). No idea if that's true, though.

Thanks for the questions. I'm generally shit at making up my mind.

Never trust a race that willingly worked with Tucker.

Why? Just use roll 20 or any number of tabletop over ip programs.

2E FR split two major pantheons in Western Faerun (Faerunian proper and Mulhorandi). It also had the celestial bureaucracy in Kara-Tur and the primordial gods they worshipped in Zakhara, plus a bunch of local cults.

Thanks, I've been itching for a good punchman type too, one of my players will be DMing soon and I'm trying to come up with something I can use that isn't monk

I considered adding something like "spend a rage use to make fists magic for an hour" or something but there should be other ways to get through magical skin without hardwiring it into the class (handwraps soaked in holy water? Using the wizard as an improvised weapon?)

It is, and lv3 is more or less martial arts. Should I make it more distinct somehow? (Pocket sand, sucker punch etc?)

>Shied
Where's my shield waifus ;_;
Then again, there really wasn't much of a reason to buy something other than strongest regular one or inesting into Tower Shield. Small equip list is still kinda disheartening.

>Using the wizard as an improvised weapon?
I'm sure the party's Wizard would be happy to be turned into close-range weaponry.

I find that the gap between "useful" and "useless" is SIGNIFICANTLY less in 5e.
I've played every single one of the "useless" classes several times now and contributed plenty to every game, in combat scenarios and non-combat ones.
I think some of it is just the crazy "optimization" guys left over from 3e and 4e not letting go of it and determining to make their CCG deckbuilding crap relevant I'm 5e even when the relevance my far two days ago had on conversations I'm having today is far greater then anything at all in 5e.
Also, admittedly a solid amount is complaining because there's not a whole lot else to talk about with the slow release schedule for 5e. Eventually you exhaust all other topics of discussion related to the game itself.

Bully's phrasing seems slightly off, should perhaps mention that it replaces Charisma (Intimidation) unless you intend for it to replace all Intimidation checks with Strength - in which case it wouldn't necessarily be replacing Charisma.

rolz is aesthetically unappealing and one player hates it for other reasons, d20 moreso with a bunch of extra complexity and one of my players swears that the dice are fucking him (I know, I know. To be fair, across 4 five-hour sessions he hasn't rolled above 5, and all my rolls against him were +15) where all I want is voice+text chat with dice rolls. If you know another good one, that's fine, I'll try it.

It IS true. And it was scrapped by 3e, which went a long way to dumbing down the Realms and creating almost all the complaints people have about it.
The huge "main" pantheon of Faerun was never universally worshipped (you won't find a lot of temples to Sune in the Moonsea for instance...or any at all in fact), and different regions of Faerun had different concentrations of worshippers, so there was plenty of competition between the faiths of even the main pantheon, and then the Mulhorandi deities and the Chessentan and aunt her deities were all completely different and didn't seem to follow the same rules.
Hell, back in 2e in certain regions of Faerun the deities didn't always even have the same NAMES between regions.

I know there's a Google hangouts app for ffg star wars, I bet there's one for d20 too.

One of the most popular things about 5e is that the gap has shortened considerably.
As for the slow releases, honestly I don't mind. They have a tiny team, that has made mistakes, so them trying hard to get it right makes sense to me. Plus, emphasis 5e has placed on balance has seeped over into the homebrews, resulting in some very well thought out ideas. Also, the lack of content makes it more acceptable to bring homebrews to your GM. The end result is more balanced, class options (Provided your GM keeps out the riffraff) and I am enjoying this immensely.

One thing most players never take into consideration: world influence. Some race/class combos are straight up way better at getting shit done in the civilized world.

Characters like half-orc barbarians are gimp as fuck if they're away from their tribe. Magic users aren't trusted by common folk, especially if they're outlanders. So, a Drow Sorcerer is gonna have a bad time trying to convince a town of Sun Elves of pretty much anything. Ebberon is the only setting I can think of where Magic Users are seen as normal everyday citizens.

Me too.
And honestly slower release means less new material that could potentially fuck up the entire game, which I'm okay with. I wouldn't mind more fluff-heavy books like the SCAG for other settings though.

I don't see how it's confusing
When making an intimidation check you usually do d20+proficiency+CHA mod

The feature says you can use "your strength modifier instead of charisma when making intimidation checks"

Meaning that it would become

D20+proficiency+STR mod

Most players I've seen are shitty roleplayers in general so not taking into account setting or anything except "performance" just sorta follows I guess.

>5e
>emphasis on balance

Huh? There are so many retarded balance decisions in 5e that I find it hard to believe anyone competent emphasized balance.

>wot4e monks
>using errata to nerf wot4e monks even further
>rangers generally
>beast master rangers
>familiars being better than BM companions
>pact of the blade warlock
>eldritch blast being as powerful as it currently is for any class with a shitty capstone.

I could go on.

This is already in the game BTW. DM is free to demand other abilities when rolling checks.