/5eg/ D&D Fifth Edition General: Multi-Class Edition

>Fighters not being good at fighting

Now you know there is something wrong with this picture.

Probably by only having his weapons drawn when attacking or with the warcaster feat

...

They're great at fighting. Two weapon fighting just gets marginally less appealing with every extra attack your class has, since as you level there are more things to do with your bonus action and the damage dice of your main hand weapon makes more of a difference

Yes, it is a bit convoluted that the 'fights with everything' fighter isn't good with two-weapon-fighting.
But that's because all the other classes kind of cheat to make it viable.

>ranger, bladesinger, bladelock, totem barbarians, rangers
These classes/archetypes make it viable by stacking bonuses each time they hit such as colossus slayer, hex, hunter's mark, rage damage, lifedrinker, that weird bladesinger add intellect ability...
>rogue
Rogues make it viable because they don't have an extra attack normally and it gives them a second chance to land their sneak attack, which all their damage comes from.

And, let's be fair.
The fighter CAN use two-weapon-fighting if he really wants to.
It just becomes a little less viable for every extra attack they gain.

If someone can buff the fighter to give him a 'add damage every time you hit' thing, such as giving him magical +3 shortswords or casting 'enlarge' on him, the fighter can use it.

Warcaster feat does jack shit with material component's spells

The pastebin in the opening has the official conversion guides from WotC, as rather sparse as they are, I think.

As for a Sha'ir... I haven't seen one... wait, I think there's one in the Al'qadim DMG material... Nope, there's not one in Scimitars Against The Dark, but there might be one in the DMG Mega in the OP.

Otherwise, we'd need to cook one up. How, I'm not sure. One could argue whether it better fits a Wizard, Sorcerer or Warlock archetype in 5e.

Actually, disregard that, there is a fighter that can use it viably.

A dex fighter.
I imagine a dex fighter's main gimmick is just using bows and such, but since they'll have low strength once melee comes into play they can either:
a) use a rapier. They can't equip a shield without taking a whole action, however.)
b) use two-weapon-fighting. Instead of 1d8+dexmod, they get 2d6+dexmod damage plus 1d6+dexmod damage for every extra attack.

'But user, why not just go ranger then?'
I don't know, you tell me.

Dex fighters and rangers are very similar. Rangers have spells and some funny features, dex fighters get what they get.

I mean, the easiest route is to take monk and just make a weapon-based monastic tradition, and there's a few homebrews floating around for it.

The only problem is that it rather pigeonholes certain campaigns ("Every player's a monk in this setting!")

So yeah, I think it'd warrant at least a full class, if not a few, just because the conceit of the fiction is distinct enough from a fighter.

Thanks for the info, I will keep looking around. Had a long discussion with my dm and the only thing we agreed on is that its not a wizard (mainly because we feel that the main casting stat should be cha).

GM lets us have a low level magic weapon (rare) for our characters, mine is a sun soul monk, I was thinking on fist weapons +1 that give me 2 ki points back for every crit, yay or nay?

My suggestion would be that Warlock is probably closest to the old "feel" of the class, being a Charisma caster who bartered for power and who specializes in bursts of magic, much like how the AD&D Sha'ir could only have 1 spell prepared at a time and was awful in an extended conflict. Cook up a suitably "elemental" bonus spell list (check the Elemental Evil Player's Guide), tinker with the Pact of the Familiar to support having a Gen, and use class features to further the crunch as you can - maybe give them some limited metamagic abilities, for example.

I would probably try to make up something that benefits your sun soul attacks, but I don't exactly know what sort of guidelines your working with

+1 weapon with a minor power.

One player wanted extra 1d6 damage, GM said no. The barb ended with a +1 Greataxe that allows him to be on rage for the entire minute.

Wait, so he doesn't need to attack every turn to maintain rage -- he just STAYS in rage for the minute?

That pretty much rectifies the one slight weakness of the barb.

That weapon pretty much obsoletes the barbarian power they get at later levels, but it's not an awfully strong power anyway.
They'll probably have a replacement weapon by then, anyway.

2 kit points is pretty good.
You get a lot of attacks as monk, and a lot of chances to regain those ki points.
A fourelements monk can spend extra ki points to deal an extra 1d10 damage for each point spent, so you can assume two ki points to be worth roughly 2d10 or more.

Not as good as 1d6 every hit (that would be ridiculous on some characters) but more interesting than it for sure. Compared to 'you don't have to maintain rage', it's definitely good.

Not to mention, a +1 weapon on someone like a monk is better than on most other characters.

Fantasy axes look retarded.

>Not to mention, a +1 weapon on someone like a monk is better than on most other characters.
Not him, but why?

The +1 damage is multiplied in value by the number of attacks. Monks get extra attacks quicker than most classes.

I knew you were going to say that...user, your extra attacks from FoB or Martial Arts are unarmed. You get no benefit from a +X weapon in those.

No u :(

That.
>monk: flurry of blows: 3 attacks
>monk: martial arts: 2 attacks
>two-weapon-fighting: 2 attacks, requires two weapons
>anyone else: 1 attack

At level 5, some classes get an extra attack. Monks do, too.

But the player just said 'fist weapons'.
Fist weapons don't exist ordinarily, and thus would be homebrewed, and are likely homebrewed to apply to all unarmed attacks.

If that isn't allowed, get a quarterstaff instead of fists.

Ya that sounds good, thanks

Monks consistently have two attacks at level 1, can burst for three at level 2, and then go up to a consistent 3 and burst of 4 at level 5 (and becomes more sustainable with levels!). The only ones who can match that are at level 10+ (Fighter 11 with PAM, TWF, or Crossbow Expert, Valor Bard who grabbed Swift Quiver, etc.).

Homebrew and rules are two entirely situations, that has nothing to do with "monks" and everything to do with "what the GM lets you ignore". So yeah, if your GM lets you ignore those rules, yes, the monk can abuse it more than others, but this is a non sequitur

Poster said fist weapon, which presumably acts as an enhancement to unarmed strikes since one doesn't actually exist in-game.

different*

You're allowed to disagree or prove something wrong without first pretending you need a question answered, faggot.

What even is the point of having to identify magic items? It just feels like a time waster.

I don't own the last suplement and neither read the last 5-6 UAs, maybe there was something new in those that I didn't know, that's why I asked, though I was expecting a misreading in the rules from that guy's side. But yeah, I might have been a little prick back there.

If you're not actually baiting, it's cool. Just follow the flow of the conversation next time. We're already talking about custom magic items, so expect a little handwaving.

I've never seen an otherwise balanced magic weapon suddenly get stupid because it helped out Flurry of Blows and Martial Arts.

>"S-sir, I think maybe we should get a wizard to identify this suspiciously glowing sword firs-"
>"Nonsense, young Pepe, this here sword is fit for a knig- OH GOD IT BURNS!"

Alright, then.
If you want it to be exactly by the rules -
You can no longer make unarmed strikes with your fists, because your fists are now technically a weapon.

Yes, that's not going to hurt your viability, but that's just stupid.

Fists are a monk weapon.

Depends how your DM runs things.

If you do it by the book and not using a variant rule, you can 100% identify items during a short rest.
However, any sensible DM with any level of taste does not do that.
This isn't 4e.
Your DM might as well just sit you on his lap and say, 'What would you like for christmas, young adventurer? Oh, a +2 sword of smiting? Here you go."

Want to play a Viking Shaman, thinking of going Goliath with Sailor as my background. However should I just go tempest Cleric for those Thunder/Lightning theme spells for Thor? Cause I was also thinking of putting 2 lvls in Druid just to change into a bear, just unsure how useful it would be.

It's not very different than that necklace that improves unarmed attacks in one of the adventures. Magic items in general have their own rules on a case by case basis anyway

>join a new group, playing an elf
>another player introduces his dwarf character
>have to resist the urge to make dwarf jokes immediately

Was I born to be an elffag?

Any stats on the Goblins yet?

Exactly. And you've just said you can't make unarmed strikes with a weapon.

Depends what color you are, I suppose

Fists aren't weapons, but they're weapon attacks

I don't even know what you're talking about now.
'Fists' the homebrewed weapon just suggestd, or 'fists' the unarmed strike?

An unarmed strike is not a melee weapon attack.
An unarmed strike does not use a weapon.

If you've made some inconveniently named weapon that's classified as 'fists', then yes.
It is a weapon attack.

>you
Veeky Forums is more than 1 guy

user is a singular entity.

Is it user and the system.

We fight the system.

One of my players wants to play a barbarian werewolf.

Can I refluff Rage as a sort of Werewolf mode? Same as regular Rage, just now you're Large and have natural weapons?

Also, should I limit them to only Wolf totem, or should I still let them mix?

Question time. Making a Dwarf Barbarian, his story is he is an ex-pro wrestler now broke, homeless, not in the best shape and now in some sort of life crisis. He wants to prove to the world that he is still the best fighter for miles around and still the undisputed champion of the gold heavy weight belt. Question is I want to play this dude as both an idiot and not wise at all, he lets his fists do the talking and feels like every moment someone is mocking him or people are forgetting just how tough and bad ass he is. So with this I wanted to make him implosive and literally just hearing one poorly chosen word from going absolute ape shit. My biggest concern is that my party may hate this and would just want to get rid of the very angry dwarf who has a tendency to charge straight at the enemy, tactics be damned and go for a full nelson. Or punch the Guard in the face because he made fun of his size.

I want to make him a valuable asset to the party combat wise but also have him be a liability if they take him out just for diplomacy and shit. Does this sound like a good character or should I go back to the drawing board?

MM P. 207: Player Characters as Lycanthropes

You're welcome.

>Or punch the Guard
>ex-pro wrestler
You mean he challenged the Guard to a one-pin match at BeerBrawlMania, right?

Tone it down a bit.

Make them prone to anger, but not chaotic stupid.

The 'dumb barbarian' is a bit overdone, anyway.

Also, if you want to punch things, you'll gimp yourself using only your fists as a barbarian.

Lycanthrope PCs to Barbarian comparisons:
Immunity to nonmagical weapon damage vs. resistance
Natural weapons vs. strength bonus
Natural Armor vs. Unarmored Defense

Sounds good, but you don't need to give them Large. Only werebears go Large, werewolves are Medium.

There's a 'shifter' race in one of the books. I can't remember which, though. Same one that had the changeling.

Dex fighters can just use rapier and shield too. Their AC and damage will be a little lower but they get better skills initiative and a stronger save for it. It's not really optimized because a crossbow with sharpshooter and xbow master is just better in most circumstances, but it's hardly not viable.

>An unarmed strike is not a melee weapon attack.
This is explicitly false, as shown in sage advice and in the PHB errata.

>An unarmed strike does not use a weapon.
However, is true.

Similar discrepancy also exists between "ranged weapon attacks" and "attacks made with a ranged weapon". See Sharpshooter.

Meaning is correct.

As for the debate as a whole, a monk cannot apply bonuses from melee weapon into unarmed strikes unless the weapon in question has been granted such power.

It be Eberron

...Yes, I mean exactly that.

Actually that would fix my issue, instead of going straight berserk when he feels offended he just first makes a grand over the top calling out of the guard and challenges him to the ring. Thanks for the idea, user.

I'm aware that's it's overdone. And yes the fists parts do gimp him. I do want to go with Tavern Brawler but also have been considering he uses a great club that is actually his signature paddle he would use in the ring to get fans going and to bash his opponents in. However I am also just gonna be using Con has his man stat as I am looking to play him more like a Tank with insane HP.

If they use a shield, they cannot use a two-handed weapon such as a non-hand-crossbow.

A shield takes an action to put on and an action to take off.

Pulling out two shortswords is easier than putting on a shield and taking out a rapier if you have to change from sniping to melee.

So, I'd call a dex fighter more versatile, since being able to fight at long range can be quite important sometimes.

Yeah, you use a single weapon and the dueling fighting style with a shield. You don't use...whatever you're talking about.

Dueling fighting style's flat +2 to damage on every hit isn't bad either. It just looses to the +10 damage from Sharpshooter/GWM.

Pro-wrestlers aren't dumb. They speak in carny jargon and politic their way to the main events. What they do in the ring requires some intelligence to be done well. You might as well play the thief/rogue who steals everything because all criminals are retarded kleptomaniacs, right? Your character is fucking boring and has no room for growth.

Well, dex fighter is either done sword and board or done as a ranged fighter.

It's just ranged fighter actually has a reason to use two-weapon-fighting, as a fighter.

Thanks for the feedback, will look into it more.

Well, with crossbow expert you don't even really have a reason to pull out a melee weapon. If something gets in your face you can just continue shooting at him.

Not but pro fantasy wrestlers don't necessarily have to be start. This guy being overly defensive and brash could also be a great starting point to his character; he's in his midlife crisis and he's incredibly insecure and paranoid that people are looking down on him. It's a great way to get him started as an adventurer and it's a got a lot of room for him to develop as well.

He probably doesn't want to play a jobber though. Stars aren't insecure.

But you probably don't want to bother getting crossbow expert anyway.

Getting a feat to use a 1d10, 18lb, 100/400ft weapon instead of a 1d8, 2lb, 150/600ft weapon seems a bit of a pain until you've got too many feats to know whatto do with.

Of course, if your DM lets you get the 'ranged attacks don't impose disadvantage and you have +1 to hit with ranged weapons' close quarters fighting style, the same applies where you don't need to switch to melee at all.

Archery for +2 to hit and then sharpshooter sounds like a good way of doing things, though. Two-weapon-fighting as back-up, since it still does 2d6+(dexmod) damage.

Putting together a campaign in Innistrad, was thinking about making crossbows the ranged 'standard' and as such, I'm considering removing the 'reload' aspect from it so Fighters and Rangers can attack twice with it at level 5 without requiring Crossbow Expert.

What do you guys think?

I actually like the sounds of that idea. My original idea may have just been over the top and pushed too much for a comedic effect. I really do like the idea though of him just being a once famous wrestler/fighter from back in the day who just burnt out over the years and is now trying to make a big comeback. Pretty much the story you see with some old 80s wrestlers today, expect the comeback part. I'll see about giving him a weapon but I also enjoy the though of him just trying to use the tactics he used in the ring out into an actual life or death fight. Now thinking on it, I'll see if I can make it more like pic related. This has been some really helpful feedback.

It's shit, no really, is fucking shit.

Does being a "pro-wrestler" at all make sense in the setting you'll be playing in?

A washed up former star wrestler is fine. I mean, the gladiator variant background is basically a former wrestler.

I have no clue just yet. Basically I am making a multitude of characters cause I have no idea what everyone else is bringing. So once I see what the party has to offer I will pick a character I think would be the best fit. And besides, gonna turn down the pro-wrestler bit and make it more into a gladiator that more or less mimics what pro wrestling is.

All that guy would have to do is point to the gladiator background in the PHB.

Which of course I am taking.

Need to watch Heath Slater promos for inspiration

He might not have been a jobber before but now for some reason he washed up, like a great actor/iconic actor who only appears in shitty films later in their career. He was once great (or at least thought they were) but they crashed and burned, and are trying to compensate for that.

As far as I know with Crossbow Expert you wind up getting a bonus action attack if you use a hand crossbow. The damage dice is only a d6 but the fact that you can add your +10 to damage makes up for the lower dice. You're also a fighter, so feats really aren't a big deal for you.

Plane Shift Zendikar has one. +2 CON, Natural Armor, Resistance to 2 Damage types and a Tool proficiency based on Subrace. They're a bit tricky at low levels because they can't get a 16 in a main stat but the racials are pretty good.

Maybe just make the standard a cross bow with some kind of cartridge action.

I'd still include bows for people out in the wilds, I'm sure they still get used.

What is the best way to use the Zendikar Vampires Blood Thirst? I was thinking a Valor Grapple Bard could work by using self buffs and expertise to make up for the low strength but do I have control of the Zombies like Raise Dead? Do they just do whatever they think will help me? or do they just act like normal zombies?

They have them in OotA, if you need a reference. IIRC, it removes the loading property, auto-reloads the crossbow after every attack, halves the range, and the cartridges take an action to reload.

Light crossbow holds six bolts per cartridge, and I flip-flop between allowing three or four for hand crossbow and eight or nine for heavy.

He's the ONE MAN BAND

I know I'd homebrewed up a port of the Book of 9 Swords classes ported to 5e, but I think I had it be that the class was called a Swordsage, and the Archetypes of the class broke down into Swordmage, Warblade, and Crusader.

Let me see if I can't find the stuff I'd brewed up for it.

Let's say I want to play a character similar to General Tarquin. Lots of visual flair and utility feats.

How do I pull that off?

New character for 5th ed since wildform doesn't completely suck: Move over BARDbarian barBEARian is here.

Yeah Druid and Barbarian is actually pretty decent, it's one of the only ways to get a damage increase in wild shape too.

When I think Tarquin in 5e I think a Valor Bard or Battlemaster both capture him well.

Until later levels you might as well be levelling up things like dexterity and perhaps getting other things you feel like getting. I wouldn't call it a major priority.
The hand crossbow part does seem like it might make that deal worth it, though.

Probably fighter 2/rogue 1/bard X I imagine if you're really trying to emulate him. Really he's more of a martial than a caster, but valor bard should fit him well enough.

Vampires suck though, and innistrad neither had vampires not werewolves.

What the fuck are you saying?

I see.

I really ought to update my PDF stash.