/5eg/ D&D 5th Edition General - Break Spells Edition

I'd repost the image here but I'm on Clover and can't access the archive. It's pretty near the end of the thread.

Quick question, is there any way for a Wizard to gain the Shillelagh cantrip and have it use the Intelligence stat? Taking Magic Initiate (Druid) would force me to use Wisdom, and the two classes that actually have options to steal other class spells (Warlock with a Tome Pact and Bard) would make it use Charisma instead.

DM fiat

High elf rogue swashbuckler. Guaranteed booming blade + sneak attack basically every round.

Or sorcerer paladin with gwf smiting factory.

>fuck up saving image

Well here is the actual picture.

>Can't into meme arrows
>Can't into posting images (nice picture for ants, retard)
>Can't into reading comprehension (nobody pointed out flaws or over complication)

So, user, how does it feel to have a sub80 IQ

>Well what if I teleport behind him and break his neck?

Pretty fucking legitimate concern imo

How would I calculate exhaustion from traveling if the party all have mounts? Obviously they aren't under any major physical strain but I'd think they'd need a break after riding for hours with the hot sun beating down on them. My campaign takes place in a desert if that helps.

Honestly not sure if trolling. 5/10, not particularly inciting.

How do you fare, fellow skele-buddies?

Alright you cucks, I'm bored, just got done going to Origins, and let me tell you, I don't think I can ever play a sword and board tank fighter ever again. Mind you, Adventurers League play, but fucking hell it was dull. At least with GWF or a polearm I can fucking do some damage, but being a tank with shield master and sentinel just hurt with how long it took for baddies to go down. Is there a way to make the tank build (other than changing classes fully, don't want to druid again), not be such a suck/repetition fest?

I tend to do it per hours when it comes to exhaustion, like you're thinking. 12 or so hours at an average pace in a good enviroment would be a good stopping point for most people and horses, so maybe 1/2 that or 1/3 of that in intense heat/dry weather like a desert?

Hey, anons? I'm interested in trying to homebrew some decent, balanced new Arcane Traditions for the 5e Wizard; I was wondering if any of these sound workable to anons, and if I might be allowed to post my efforts here for critique, refining and balance?

Elementalist Schools: Earth, Air, Water, Fire, Wood, Metal

Defiler

Preserver

Anyone ever make art, regardless of quality, about their campaign shenanigans? This happened last night

Going Battlemaster, Paladin or Moondruid ?

but it wouldn't need to leave the bonfire, because your polearm gives you 10ft reach and they don't eat the opportunity attack until they leave it. They could also just strafe a circle around you and get out of it.

I was straight battlemaster, maybe going to dip paladin for some extra burst and utility.

Mind you, I didn't go paladin because we had a paladin/barbarian mix, and we needed someone with some martial battlefield control. Battlemaster does that too well, especially if you need another front line hp meat shield and you don't want to be a druid.

Battle master and good Roleplay works just fine for me. I love my Goliath gladiator / axe and board fighter.

Can anyone link the list that compiles all official character choices?

I'll be honest, I think it would have been better if there was more roleplay involved. I like a good mix of the three pillars (Combat, Exploration, Roleplay) and our DM /and/ half the table favored combat heavily. So there was no way to breathe any life into the walking stat block.

I might try it again in the near future with a friend group, give it another feel

Sounds like a solid plan to me.

Hey Veeky Forums

I'm not gonna be able to find the time to prepare tomorrow's session. Fortunately my last session was the end of the campaign so i can go with a one-off this time.

Would you guys happen to know a good, self-contained one-shot for three PCs?
Preferably with some undeads in there, and not a dungeon. Three last sessions were in one.

I'm pretty good at translating from other editions on the fly, so I don't really care about that. Thanks !

The bonfire only damages -
1. When cast
2. When a creature FIRST enters the bonfire
3. When a creature ends its turn in the bonfire

So I don't think that works, does it?

Doing a 5e campaign about a cult to a false lizard god. Should the boss be a cleric or warlock?

How do I make the game interesting for my players? The bard and cleric are having a blast, but the spelless ranger variant and the champion fighter are both complaining a lot.

we need details.
what are they complaining about?
do you think what they're saying is fair?
who/what's to blame according to you?

How about a real lizard God?

Cold open:

Has anyone successfully run a game without telling the players anything beforehand?

Plot-twist: the god is an Aboleth and the boss is an enslaved Cleric fighting alongside the illusionary image of its "god".

Basically, every time I think of a puzzle or object for them, the party decided using a cantrip or spell is the optimal way to solve it. I try to burn the spell slots, but the party is very cautious, and always thinks of a good way to take a long rest. Short of cheesing them with an ambush every time, I can't think of a way to make the ranger out fighter relevant.

Going to be running a campaign where the players are the rulers/the rulers entourage of a city/nation, I was wondering if anyone had suggestions on which dnd setting would be more appropriate for that style, if any?

This nigga, this.
Damn, I love aboleths.

Give them a time limit.

It's possible, but you're only sabotaging yourself without making sure everyone are on the same page, at least theme and focus wise.

Either do or place them in a cavernous dungeon with enemies that burrow.
They won't feel safe enough to rest for very long.

> the party decided using a cantrip or spell is the optimal way to solve it.
So... Why don't you pick puzzles that can't be solved by the party's cantrips or spells?

> the party [...] always thinks of a good way to take a long rest
Random encounters aren't cheese. They're one of the pillars of D&D. Because it's a very dangerous world out there.
Also, you could try switching long rests to 12 hours, and short rests to 10 minutes. DMG has guidelines for that. I think it could work with your party composition, especially if the bard already has Font of Inspiration.

>I can't think of a way to make the ranger out fighter relevant.
If you have a Ranger as PC, you have no other choice but to add survival aspects to your game, like it or not. There are ways to make that fun, but it's gonna be work. And maybe the other PCs are going to dislike it but that's not really your problem. Your Ranger will love you for asking the others "so yeah, you guys have been fucking around for a while now... you're getting hungry now. What do you do?"

Champion Fighter is probably the most boring archetype in 5e. If the player can't find how to have fun with that, it's kinda "on him". See for advice on making melee characters have fun in combat. Outside of combat, give him strength/constitution skill challenges (tavern brawls etc.)

Yes... sort of.
Current campaign I told everyone to make a character, and background, send them to me. The only restriction was no evil alignments.
I wanted to test my ability to weave together a bunch of random shit. So far it has actually gone pretty well.
I would guess though if you're planning a game and have an idea what the setting, villain, etc. will be and aren't willing to adapt it to suit the players class choices, that's probably not a good idea.

i feel like this same post gets posted literally every thread. "How do I make the game interesting for my players? The [two spell casters] are having a blast, but the [no spells ): ] are both complaining a lot."

I'm not in every thread but I see this at least once a day when I check in.

I'm starting to get suspicious it's the same person posting a variation of it every thread to get people to believe that playing martials in D&D is boring.
If your martial is really that bored, you need to pump up your DM skills. If that doesn't work, suggest to a martial that they take the magic initiate feat or multiclass and stop complaining.

It's possible, but it's also possible that this is a common occurrence. As a DM myself I've always felt that casters are easier to dm for, and my players seem to think that casters are more fun to play too. They've actually tried to kill off martial characters they were playing because they got so bored at some points.

maybe try 1pagedungeon for inspiration, some of them arent dungeon per say

I'm beyond suspicious at this point honestly. The formatting is too similar between each post.

See maybe it is, but it is literally the same format every time. "How do I make the game for my [players/martials]" or "How do I keep my casters from overshadowing my [Fighter/Barbarian]." The post almost ALWAYS mentions a lore bard and a champion fighter too. I wouldn't be surprised if those two were shit poster-kun's two pet peeve classes on either end of the spectrum.

Of course, this isn't an issue in other systems I've played like wod or eote. In both of those systems casters and martials are relatively well balanced, because casting comes at the expense of developing skills.

Dnd would probably be better if every martial was a skill monkey.

5e is pretty well balanced.

Nice reaction image
Saved

Agreed, except when it comes to out of combat interaction.

Yeah I have a picture of one of my players poorly photoshopped on to a barbarian because of the description he gave for his characters (my girlfriend drew character art for everyone based on references they gave and he just said "like me but older and more muscular)

Does anyone know when the "tank" role first got shoehorned into D&D? I feel like it was never a thing until relatively recently.

You have your "hard to kill" characters and your "easier to kill, but make up for it with class features" guys, but it wasn't until 4e when classes started getting mechanics that forced creatures to attack them instead of the rest of the party.

Was tanking before then just an honor system thing that obligated the DM to target the people with the highest AC first?

They also tend to mention martials wanting to kill their characters off rather than just retiring them or whatever

(someone else)
I'll grant that the classes are furthest apart on that front,but even then, between background features and a few more minor class/race abilities here and there, player characters in general just have more stuff they can do now, across the board.

The PCs who are least well-equipped for exploration/socializing stuff, are still almost always better equipped on those fronts than they've typically been in previous D&D versions.

I know, I just want people to critique the post and discuss more shenanigans. People are more likely to note and discuss the content of a post if there's something incorrect in it. Good catch. Remove (4d8+5) from the total.

It was at least partly down to 'threat assessment' on part of the DM but tanking goes further back than 4e. At the very least the 3.5e Knight (PHB2) had "challenge enemy" mechanics.
It was pretty weak to be honest but I enjoyed playing it

>only pretending.jpg

I think it's basically bullshit people put in their mind that they "need" because of MMORPG. Last DM I had (who was absolutely horrendous) literally said out loud "well I'll keep focusing the tank then" while playing his drows. Fucking A.

On the other hand, as you said, you simply have more resilient characters than others. Meatshields or not, having characters with different durability is pretty important to a pary. But I don't think that's anything else.

> mechanics that forced creatures to attack them
In 5e I believe you only have mechanics that says: you may attack something else, but you're gonna be at disadvantage. Even then, they're pretty rare I believe, arent they?

>i only made a mistake so that i can fish for attention harder.webm

Sure. 5e has definitely made improvements.

Honestly, I feel the biggest thing holding dnd back on this front are the grognard fans who insist on having nearly every martial class be limited to hitting things with swords. Champion fighters apparently weren't enough options for the loud subset of fans that have a pathological fear of options.

In early editions, just being in melee with a fighter meant you had to give them your attention. If you try to move away from them, they get at least one free attack. If you try to cast a spell it can get interrupted. Good luck using a ranged weapon. So anyone not in the melee is basically safe from anyone mired in the melee. That was tanking. Of course, there's lots of exceptions for things like dragons.

4e's mechanic wasn't generally about forcing enemies to attack you; it was that you would interfere with their attacks or punish them if they attacked your allies - and that just so happens to make it better for them to attack you.

>You have your "hard to kill" characters and your "easier to kill, but make up for it with class features" guys, but it wasn't until 4e when classes started getting mechanics that forced creatures to attack them instead of the rest of the party.

tanking doesn't typically work like that in 4e. however, there was a 3e class called the knight with mechanics that force enemies to attack them.

reposting the 5e shadowcaster homebrew, looking for feedback.

docs.google.com/document/d/10ORCC8IwwqgTv6kSy-wnGgfkegEYejOke9OwGnsN16c/edit?usp=sharing

I mean, if you need to disbelieve me in order to feel of superior intellect, then more power to you. You're entitled to your head canon.

Stay mad, bitch boi.

Nice dubs, faggots

Been away for a few threads, but isn't the shadowcaster just "5E wizard", these days? You get 1-9 spellcasting, eventually unlimited uses of your favorite 1st and 2nd level spells, extra uses of your favorite 3rd level spells, can restore uses of any 5th level spells, and can cast 6th-9th level spells about once a day.

Still, bonfire looks to be a pretty neat spell.

Its main limitation is its range and possibility of getting in the way of allies.
Next time I play something sorcerer-y, I'm going to make sure I can try getting it.

Wait a second, isn't it concentration? That'd kinda suck.

Fuck off

60 feet range
Concentration

one of your pcs is a death slaadi?

Just speaking from my experience and opinions, but outside of a few options here and there (i have never played 4e but I have played 3.5 and 5e), I have never seen an aggro mechanic in D&D. With that said, the way I have always done tanking, as a player, is to try and position myself in the middle of as many enemies as possible as fast as possible to draw their attention and hopefully their aggression.

As a DM I usually have melee baddies go for the closest threat while the ranged baddies go for the strongest threat on the party's side of the battle (which varries depending on what the party decides to do/cast in the battle)

Attack of opportunity is a pretty solid "tanking" mechanic. Controls the battlefield, making you "sticky" and hard/expensive to escape from - thus, they have to attack you.

Fuck off.

What do you mean "is it a concentration spell"? Everything in 5e is a concentration spell.

Not really, I still need to update the spell list for the shadowcaster, but the spellcasting progression for the shadowcaster is a bit wonky compared to the wizards. Theyre also sneakier and only require somatic components for casting their spells. That being said, unlimited uses of early level spells isnt unlocked until lvl 18. By contrast a shadowcaster gets a metric fuckton of uses by level 13, though never unlimited.

As far as fixing things go, I like "give better skill options to fighters/barbs/monks" much, much better than some of the other shit I've seen crop up on here from time to time. Maybe expertise in one skill? Barbarians could have expertise in Athletics, Fighters/Monks could have a selection of skills they could choose from...

I think the key is to make sure it's still less than what Rogues/Bards get, but not bad all the same.

Pure spell attacks tend not to be

5e attempts to leave a lot of the martial rules unwritten. Where spellcasters are pretty restricted to what their spells say they do, martials can improvise. Sure parry, bull rush, trip and disarm are all things the battlemaster is good at, but there's no reason the champion or a barbarian can't do these things without the superiority dice bonus. The charge action isn't gated by a feat, either.

>tfw when your characters are always used as "you go/touch/charge it first" guinea pigs"
>tfw you took the alert feat so you're never surprised when you get ass raped

YES

Guy who posted question here. That's some good shit. I'm stealing it

>Swashbuckler rogue
>Lv 16
>20cha, 20dex, alert
>+15 bonus to initiative

...

Mostly buffs are.

It means you can't use buffs alongside it.

60ft isn't as good as firebolt, but it's still acceptable for what it is.
The concentration is what hurts if you're throwing haste around or something.

Throw in 2 levels of bard for +18 from Jack of All Trades.

>swashbuckler rogue with stupid initiatives
>everyone rolls initiative
>everybody else rolls 16+
>you roll a goddamn 1
>combat ends before its even your turn
Some people just want to watch the world burn.

So what's the best pick for a Dragonborn's Draconic Heritage?

Rolling down the line, got 15 INT & 15 CHA, everything else around 10-13. What do I build /5eg/?

Wizard/warlock multi

> not homebrewing a psychic lazer (120 ft range)
> not asking your DM to incorporate diamond dragons in his setting
> not being the best version of sorcery you could be

lol what a fag xD

>DM ignores the tanky dude and kills all the squishies

>All that's left is the tanky dude.

Versus

>Tanky dude gets attacked
>Everyone gets to play, at least for a little while.

That said, I think our DM has loaded die whenever he attacks our Wizard or Paladin. Or he just declares he crit just to see how we scramble to their aid...

Enchantment wizard, pick a half-elf, be the bard that actually went to college and didn't drop out to play guitar and fuck whores.

>In DnD it looks like all these complicated rules

if that small paragraph in the PHB was too much for you, then this game is not for you.