/5eg/ 5th Edition D&D - "Tee-fling or Tie-fling" Edition

Fuck sake it's german for 'deep' as in 'deepling' as in 'demonic.' Meaning it's pronounced "teef" just like its root word, and there is actually no argument to be made against that pronunciation aside from "I am wrong but I don't care." Which is fine, just don't claim you're right and we don't have a problem.

Tieflings are people just like everyone else, but since they're attractive people they tend to attract trouble anyway. Or at least that's what they mostly figure - they ARE mostly attractive, but their luck is a goodly bit worse than most as well, because the exiled goddess responsible for the first Tiefling was cast out because the god of fortune called in a favor, and now he fucks with her offspring. Technically they're not even demonic; they've existed since before she was exiled. It's forbidden to interfere with the affairs of other deities which by extension covers their children, Tieflings and Orcs are the only two races not covered by that edict, and Orcs really just get their prayers ignored because they're actually indigenous to the plane and were never affiliated with a deity to begin with, though that does mean that when their prayers have an effect it's always a strong one because it's never a case of "yeah, fine, okay" on the part of the deity.

Why did 4th and 5th editions establish Tieflings as a base race? Now every single party I play in has a hot red succubus (or succuboy) and they're always flirty cunts.
>tfw the DM put in Tieflings dancers at the sleezy club
HE KNOWS

you answered your own question

people want to be the special snowflake, and teefling does that + the potential edge of "my dad is a demon and i'm a demon prince/princess" or some other bullshit CRAWLING IN MY SKIIIN garbage

faggots love that gay shit. dwarves, standard elves (non-drow), humans, and gnomes are the only acceptable races. goliaths are ok too i guess

>gnomes
>acceptable

Halflings are far more acceptable than gnomes, at least they fulfill an archetype rather than being lolrandum

>faggots like that shit
Okay, now, you mean people who play Tieflings? Everyone is hot for demons...right?

I'm trying to fix dual wielding for my players. Which of the following options would be best, balance-wise?

1) Off-hand does not require bonus action to use, but requires a roll to hit and has to be tied to the attack action; scales with Extra attack

2) Having a second weapon simply adds one extra weapon die per the number of attacks to your damage roll if you hit with your primary; does not use up your bonus action

3) Uses up bonus action, but is not required to be used as a part of the attack action

Dual wielding is the weakest of all weapon styles by far, and I want to tweak that a bit.

>>I'm british
My deepest condolences, friend.

I don't see the difference between "ee" and "ie". Is "ie" like "тьeфлинг" (google translate will tell you how it sounds)? If it is it's fucking retarded

Bitch I'm fabulous

>and how do you pronounce it?
Weakest race in the PHB

I'd say to have it still use a bonus action, but have it scale up as long as your class has extra attack. So at say, Level 10 in Fighter, Ranger, etc. you instead get 2 attacks when making an extra attack.

I'm not sure if that would numerically bring it quite in line, but it would help boost it at higher levels when it starts to lag behind.

My group gives them 2 off hand attacks at 11th level.
So they start with one normal and one bonus action off hand
At 5th level 2 normal and one bonus action off hand
At 11th level 2 normal and one bonus action two off hand

>has to use bonus action
That's honestly what bothers me the most. It doesn't take a bonus action to use a shield or swing a 2h weapon, so it shouldn't take a bonus action to use the offhand either. RAW, a warrior wouldn't be able to use second wind and swing his offhand at the same turn which makes zero sense.

Well, I forgot that if they're fighters at 11th level they get 3 normal

So your GM is just being arbitray for no reason?

I think it's to split it up in a rules-sense so you can more easily keep track of which weapon you're attacking with.

You could probably just convert it to not use a bonus action without much issue though. Just have the off-hand weapon be an extra attack without the caveat.

>For no reason
Actually there's a reason, and the reason is that TWF start falling behind at mid levels, that's why at mid leves they get a bost in the for of a second off hand attack. Till 11th level TWF works the same as before.

Btw, I forgot to add the most important thing, this change is in the TWF feat (dual wielding), without feat you don't get the 2nd off hand attack.

Yeah, I think I like the option 1 most as well.

I'll rule that their two-weapon fighting style is practiced enough that they can attack one target with both weapons and not have to use a bonus action, but if they want to attack different targets with their weapons it takes a bonus action. Or I'll just make them attack with D/A.

Well fighters at 11th level would get 3 attacks with mainhand, so changing that third attack for an offhand attack is really arbitrary.

But damage-wise, even with extra attack fully benefiting the offhand, it's still slightly worse than two handed weapons after you factor in great weapon fighting and two-handed style.

>great weapon fighting
Great weapon master, that is.

Eh, slightly worse is fine, since you can also have better AC, assuming I'm not mis-remembering that one feat.

It's enough of a boost to make it a viable option

>and how do you pronounce it?
I just call them deeplings.

>so changing that third attack for an offhand attack is really arbitrary.
The wut? a 11th level TWF will have 3 normal attacks and 2 off hand.

I meant that it's slightly worse WITH offhand scaling with extra attack. RAW you only ever get one, which is hilariously bad in comparison.

See:
>At 11th level 2 normal and one bonus action two off hand

But even with 3+2 it's a lot worse than great weapon fighting. 3+3 would be about even, when factoring the +1AC.

I posted that, I know what I meant
I was talking about the average class who just get 2 attacks (5th level extra attack feature), only fighter gets a 3rd at 11th level and that's why I didn't count him. If you try to be nitpiky at least take into account that at 5th level Valor Bards and Favoured Souls don't get extra attack.

>Great weapon fighting
Oh, you mean the style that only gives you 0.8 damage at best per swing? Or you mean the feat that gives you a -5 to attack, that neither of you seem to count ever, called great weapon master?

Like I'm talking to autists.

>Like I'm talking to autists.
welcome to Veeky Forums

Anyone have (female) blue teifling art? I was trying to find some but its almost all cheese or porn. I need something for my Teifling fighter who will fly around and shoot things.

>Or you mean the feat that gives you a -5 to attack, that neither of you seem to count ever, called great weapon master?

Yes, GWM. The -5 is substantial, but especially with advantage it's not that harsh. And you forget that GWM also gives an additional attack on bonus action if you crit or fell a creature.

As a barbarian who uses reckless attack almost always, yes, advantage helps, but you still hit worse than someone hitting normally

>my dad is a demon
Tieflings aren't that much demon.

That's a good point, but then again the damage is great, so it's necessary.

The point of this whole thing is to bring TWF more in line with the other styles, and I think the simplest and most effective way is to just make it scale 1:1 with extra attack.

>"my dad is a demon and i'm a demon prince/princess"
More like my great great great grandfather was a demon

Also yeah
And all monks are weeb
All wizards/clerics/druids are powergamers
All fighters are unimaginative whinny faggots
All rogues are lolrandum evil
All rangers are muh dritzz
All barbarians are muderhoboes
All dwarves are muh ale and muh masterwork crafts
All gnomes are muh lolrandum tinkers
All elves are snob faggots
Etc

See, I can generalize too

At lvl 11 you obtain an extra attack with your bonus action and with feat you do an extra attack if you hit with both weapons.

>it's the race/class that makes That Guys
Everyone who really believe this is a retard, a That Guy will still make edgy mary sue faggots even if you only allow Human Fighters

Can anyone tell me why Circle of Death is a 6th lvl spell? It looks like a larger radius Fireball to me. Am I not seeing the big upside of it or is it just as bad as I think it is?

Playing a Lore Bard/Warlock dip but I'm a little worried about when melee attacks come a-knocking. I have thunderwave and will get mage armor as my invocation when I get a second warlock level, but I'm still squishy as hell with my shitty leather armor. Should I get a melee cantrip or something to fall back on if they decide to get right up in my grill?

>DMing last night
>Party of 7, so I increase the number of enemies to compensate for the large party
>They open a door to a room with 20 skeletons
>roll a 1 for skeleton initiative
>rogue pours his oil flask into his bag of ball bearings
>fighter throws the oiled ball bearings all over the room
>bard casts cloud of daggers in one of the back corners of the room
>cleric casts turn undead
>have to roll 20 wisdom saving throws for turn undead, then another 15 Dex saving throws for those that failed to see who falls prone, then additional damage for those that walked into cloud of daggers
>Ranger tosses their torch into the room, igniting the ball bearings
>rolling 20 1d4s for fire damage
>skeles turn
>not a single skeleton makes it to attack the party
>30 minutes and hundreds of die rolls later, all the skeletons are dead except one who escapes past the party, spooked out of his skull by what he just witnessed
I'm glad my players came up with such an inventive way of mass skeleton disposal, but no way am I going to have another encounter like that where I roll hundreds of times per turn.

It's your fault for having 7 players

Also learn to roll less, roll only one 1d4 for all the skellies, or divide the 20 skellies in groups of 4 or 5 and roll once per each group

Going to run a demon campaign as one of my players asked for that. Now I made a setting, where demons are all fucked up and hated by everyone and the same player wants to play as a Tiefling. Any thoughts how to justify, that he is fighting against his own kind?

Well "Tiefling" is german for "deepling". So I guess it's pronounced german with a long ie.
Ergo:
Teef-ling; the EE like in nEEt

Our group is already splitting after this last dungeon, it didn't take long for me to discover that 3-5 is the sweet spot for satisfying rp, combat, and not having to schedule sessions that work with 7 other people's schedules.

Running CoS soon and I was thinking what to do with those cleric/paladin players of mine.

As far as i know the gods have no influence on the realm on which Barovia is located,
I dont want to rid them of their powers, instead i thought that the mists of Barovia or maybe one of the Dreadlords makes a deal with them for their time staying.

Is this a good idea or would you do this otherwise?

You could always have the clerics and paladins go through some kind of consecration ritual, so their holy symbol/weapon/whatever is temporarily a conduit for their god to assist them in the realm of Barovia?
Just an idea, making a deal with a dreadlord would work too, might seem out of character, depending on their personality.

I'm looking for some profecies for my campaign. I plan on having a lot of them, but only one of them being true, though for now I mostly need them for fluff. Would be totally sweet if they rhymed as well.

#NotAllTieflings bro

Could make for some interesting interactions.

>Magic that summons creatures or objects from other planes functions normally in Barovia, as does magic that involves an extradimensional space.
>>>While in Barovia, characters who receive spells from deities or otherworldly patrons continue to do so
>spells that allow contact with beings from other planes function normally-with one proviso: Strahd can sense when someone in his domain is casting such a spell and can choose to make himself the spell's recipient, so that he becomes the one who is contacted.
there is no real reason to remove any powers from clerics/paladins apart from spells that would let them escape barovia. the only exception is if they try to contact their god, strahd will be aware of this attempt, and can either let it happen, or make them contact him instead

>Just got a robe of eyes for my sneaky halfling who always had trouble because he can't see in the dark.

Other than being blinded by light spells, what kind of fun can I expect?

Tieflings in our group's setting don't have physical markers that identify them as a race of their own, and are generally just considered to be humans who have innate sorcery and a predilection towards worship of the Mother of the Immortal Flame (being able to innately mess with small fires via thaumaturgy and having fire resistance, among other things, has been seen as Her blessing to them).

Putting some eyes on the inside and going mad from knowledge mortals must not grasp.

It does look a bit sucky for a 6th level spell, however it's radius is 3 times bigger than Fireball's. That thing can take on a whole army. And it does necrotic, a far less resisted type of damage.

I also think the image of dozens of people shriveling to empty husks as their life force is drained seems pretty awesome.

All of those are true, though.

Yeah, never play rpgs, Veeky Forums

Luckily enough my DM only allows one of any snowflake race unless we've all got a damn good reason for being all half dragon. We won't see a Tiefling join in until our dragon druid kicks it.

What are the rules for dispelling your own non-instantaneous spells? Some explicitly state in their description that they can be dispelled as a bonus action or an action, but some don't say one way or another, or state ambiguous circumstances in which dispelling automatically occurs.

I'm wondering specifically if Tenser's Floating Disk can be dispelled. I want to use it to drop an object of upper limit 500lbs onto enemies I've dropped into a 10 foot deep pit.

TL;DR can Tenser's Floating Disk be dispelled?

You should go read the spell description again because it doesn't like elevation changes.

Checked.

Its upper limit on instantaneous elevation change is 10 ft. (so the pit would need to be less than but not equal to 10 ft.)

I think the problem with Tieflings, Aasimars and all the planetouched races is that it's hard to understand where they fit into your DM's game world, unless he really gives them a place.

Now, I'm not a huge fan of these races personally. But in my 3.5 game, I do have aasimars. There is an ancient fortress city where descendents of slaves of a fallen angel reside. Some are human, some are aasimars. The culture is specific enough that if you wanted to play a PC from this place, you'd have a firm backing for an Aasimar.

Haven't done the samething with tieflings or other planetouched yet.

In what way can you possibly support that using examples from the English language?

Anyway, teef-ling.

tie (as in TIE fighter)- af- ling

> chastises speshul snoflaks
> goliaths okay tho
My good colored friend, were you aware that you are visible to me?
youtube.com/watch?v=o6KpwJOm_Zw

In other news, fuk gnomes and fuk u. Halflings > gnomes because they're not just beardless dorfs.

>you can't ride a disk without someone pulling it

Oh well, this is why we have familiars I guess

>Tieflings are a core player option since 4e
>Demonic appearance
>Make it back into the PHB for 5e

>Aasimar aren't even a core option in 4e Devas are not aasimar
>Angelic appearance
>Only get mentioned in 5e's DMG as an example of how to build a race

I know you can easily brew them back in, but I think WotC has shit taste when it comes to these sorts of things. I don't like dragonborn much either, and I think that including drow as an elf option attracts some of the worst kinds of players. Particularly the ones who bitch about their drow character being rejected and not just in 5e

See Also Aasimar is an example on how to make a new race, sure, but it's an actual an official race, you might not like it mechanically though, is understandable, there're some races that mechanically speaking are meh as fuck.

Dude, demons are dicks and often tieflings turn up without warning generations after the bloodline got mixed in. Not that most people care, so they accuse the mother of sleeping with demons or the parents of being cultists.

As such, the upbringing of a tiefling is often shitty and if they realise that the guy who caused all this is still out there with his buddies laughing it up, damn right some tieflings are going to aspire to slap that smug bastard's shit-eating face. Preferably with a mace.

This, same with warlocks, I remember then 3.5 description of warlocks that said that one of the biggest enemies of demons were the guys who made pacts with them and that good warlocks are a thing, and a dangerous thing for the forces of evil.

Have to say that in 3.5 the pact shouldn't have to be a willing thing, someone could have made that pact for you, or they could have tricked you into sign something that turned to be a pact with a demon, don't remember any of that in 5e descriptions, but again, 5e descriptions are pretty short and simple.

I need to pick a race to populate an empire my character founds after the party's characters retire. We had a great year dicking around and eventually conquered a flying city, and sailed off into the sunset to conquistador a new world. While the rest of the party built two competing factions of colonies, my character flew even further to forge a caste-based empire from the locals.
The DM is giving me a choice of race, and that's where I get stuck. The setting is 100 years after the foundation of the colonies, and I'd like to set up the empire as a long term overlooming antagonist. What's a race that matures in less than 30 years, lives over a hundred, make at least average-tier warriors, and are good with tech? DM has stipulated that non-core races are preferred

help me out Veeky Forums

I would go with option 1. Maybe have it be at discount advantage? Or roll another die after main hand and use the lowest of the two so that off hand can only ever hit if main hand does.

So, there's a bunch of races, kits and archetypes I'd like to try and translate from older editions and Pathfinder. Would discussion about stuff like that be okay in this topic?

go ahead, that sounds pretty interesting. I'd like to try something like that but I would probably just make some either OP or trash-tier shit.

Find a lost tribe of those winged elves from Faerun and teach them how to tech.

That sounds pretty good actually, that way dual wielding is not a no-brainer for rogues.

what if it's tie-ef-ling or tee-ef-ling, potentially even ti-ee-fling?

There's a very real possibility that it's a triple syllable word

Because 4E thought it was an mmo, and fucking Draenei.
Seriously, the voice actor in their stupid animated commercial even had a Draenei-style accent. And despite the description specifying small horns and thin tails, every single picture looked like a Draenei without hooves.
And 5E wasn't willing to walk back the racial additions, which is why tieflings and dohvakiin are in the main book now.
>That great part where they try to quote established lore for each race, but have to use a short story that's less than two years old for the dragonborn.

Go for it. Homebrew hasn't been much of a problem or even a thing really since people are allowed to upload their ideas and make a few cents off of them. If anything it would be a refreshing break from arguing over the rules that exist.

>Fuck sake it's german for 'deep' as in 'deepling' as in 'demonic.' Meaning it's pronounced "teef" just like its root word
/thread

Thri-Kreen

Thanks. Well, off the top of my head, the stuff I'm most interested in trying to adapt are the Aranea, Gnoll, possibly the Kobold, the Pathfinder Changeling (aka the "Cute Witch Girl spawn of hags"), and, if allowed, some Ravenloft fanmade races; the Dread Genasi and the Caliban Strains.

Actually, making 5e adaptations of the 4e Genasi wouldn't be a bad thing too, if folks are okay with that.

Class-wise, the big things I want to discuss at the moment are the kits from Complete Necromancer in AD&D and the Elementalist Archetypes for Pathfinder Wizards.

Anyone got any preferences? I'll probably come up with more stuff sooner or later, but these are the big things bugging me.

>Because 4E thought it was an mmo
People like you still exist?

>why did WotC put this popular fantasy race that lots of people want to play into its childrens' fantasy game

Gee, I dunno.

Would a build that just takes Magic Initiate at every opportunity be viable?

>4e is an MMO meme
Do come on, dear. Please try to apply yourself.

You can only take Magic Initiate once, so... sure?

4e Genasi were cool as hell, especially if you add in all the abyssal and sun-scorched versions of them.

Oh, I didn't know you could only take it once. Is there a rule anywhere that states that?

PHB pg 165.

>You can take each feat only once, unless the feat's description says otherwise.

Bastards of Erebus for life!

>Draenei
I actually had to google it but you know that form appeared in media way before world of warcraft, righ? it's a fucking demon like creature

Yeah, I thought so myself. Since we already have the basic elemental quartet, I think that to properly "convert", we'd need Lightning, the Sun-Scorched Quartet (Ember, Magma, Sand, Sun) the Abyssal Quartet (Caustic, Cinder, Plague, Void) and a racial feat to let them shift between elemental incarnations.

Aranea is probably going to be the trickiest one to try converting. Reason why? Well... check the wiki article on it; I'm the guy who wrote the stats from older editions there.

1d4chan.org/wiki/Aranea

Dunno, it sucks though. They're a shitty race and only shitlers play as them.

>childrens' fantasy game
In that case, I've clearly been DMing wrong