/5eg/ Fifth Edition General

One of the things I've used is Bad Moon Rising in the Quests of Doom books. It's overall a very good adventure and can usually be completed in a session or two, and can be placed pretty much anywhere into an existing adventure.

Then you're arguing that passive Perception shouldn't exist at all, because that's literally all it's for.

>Same way just having a high Dex doesn't mean you can just auto-succeed an acrobatic stunt.

Funny you should mention that, because AC works in exactly the same way. It's a static value affected by your Dex. You don't worry about "Oh, what if you're having a bad day and not dodging well," because that kind of randomness is already covered by the attack roll.

I try to limit opposed rolls as much as possible, because it doubles the amount of variance for no good reason. The results of a Stealth check to beat a guard's passive Perception are a lot more sane than those of a Stealth check opposed by a guard's Perception check.

Am I seeing correctly, and that skull-hatted kobold's being carried in a giant wok filled with loot?

A miserable little pile of experience points.

Will Volo have Mind Flayer Liches?

Possibly :)

is that 2nd from the left kobold covering its tits

is it a girl kobold

Is there such a thing as quick reference / cheat sheets for 5e with rules for different specific situations?

PLAYABLE MINDFLAYERS WHENNNN

i want to be a lich

do kobolds even have tits, i think one of the devs said dragonborns don't have tits, so they shouldn't have either. maybe they imitate other humanoids?

anthropocentrism in fantasy and fiction triggers me a bit, i'm sorry.

>Mind Players
Never ever, unfortunately. They just aren't balanced for party use.
You know what I want, though? Playable flumphs.

No. Always evil. Player races can, at best, be usually evil

>flumphs
or a rogue modron, that'd be fun.

doesn't lore talk about rogue/outcast illithids being neutral and hence shunned away from their civilization and/or hunt?

if drows can be playable, then i'm sure someone can find a way to make a good mindflayer. if anything i'd be more worried about racial balance rather than alignment.

which in turn leaves me asking for a psionic/psionicist class as well.

psst
hey buddy
they're working on psionics at the moment
they came out with a UA about it
it's pretty good so far :)

No mindflayers. They are gross

don't be racist, it's not their fault they have squid heads

Yes it is.

You're doing rolls in a bit of a silly way, so if course you're going to get metagamey players. Failed rolls shouldn't be 'nothing happens,' that's boring as sin, especially given the fact that you're almost always going to have something planned if they pass.

>plan for player to hear rubble crunch underfoot (DC 0, obvious)
> player roll to spot a shadow on the wall before the source runs, revealing direction (DC 11, not a given)
>roll fails
> "you hear rubble crush underfoot"

A fail that leaves you where you started but without all the options you had the first time you failed is just bad pacing.

nuh uh

you are gross.

Just realized that lizardfolks mentality is literally the way I like to play druids. I hate when people assume you are playing as a treehugger when you go druid

same

deranged forest ranger that might try to eat enemies if they get hungry is my preference

Just ask your GM.

no need to apologize user, thats why im asking

What parts of the game do you fluff? What have you fluffed for your campaign and how did you do it?

I fluffed that my monk's long death ability to gain temporary hit points on kill sucked the life out of the target.

I need stats for Volatiles from dying light!

Is crafting pointless?

Also; I'm making a wild magic sorcerer, is he a stereotype Mage that sits from afar and casts all the time? Doesn't seem like he has many spells

Can someone explain to me subtle magic? I can just cast a spel with no one knowing? Do I need to pass any checks regarding casting it?

And twinned spell, what constitutes a target? I saw spells like ray of something I can't twin.

That depends on what you mean by passive Perception. You are using "passive" to mean a fixed degree, a known value. There is no reason for any of the stats to be considered more than the upper limits of what a character is capable of, but they can still fail. That is the reason why there are rolls for them at all. I am using it similar to the notion of a passive skill/trait as opposed to an active skill. Active skills are triggered when the player wants to use them. Passives are always active. They're background. Like, for instance, the ability to detect something. The ability to perceive a voice in a crowd - or the click of a trap.

Actually it is funny you should mention
>You don't worry about "Oh, what if you're having a bad day and not dodging well," because that kind of randomness is already covered by the attack roll.

Because this is merely roll substitution. One type of role in place of another, yet the variability, the chance of success or failure, is still accounted for. Does Dexterity play no role in the roll? Of course it can. It is accounted for by potential modifiers. The game itself makes the connection for you. As I said, the game cannot handle every factor involved so they do what they can. It is a kludge at best, and yet it works.

Yes

He can if you want to be

No checks it looks like you do nothing

You can twin a spell as long as it effects only one target. Fireball you cannot twin but witch bolt you can

um, what? That's a completely unmanageable way to run a game. Failed rolls usually do nothing or leave you in a worse position than where you started. That's where the whole element of risk comes from. A game where you succeed at everything you try wouldn't be D&D.

>tfw Paladin
>DM brings out faeries
FUCK YOU CANT BE CHARMED
>DM uses assassins
FUCK YOU CANT BE POISONED
>DM uses Dragon
FUCK YOU CANT BE FRIGHTENED

Being the "I'm literally a heroic hero" class is so great sometimes. In a party of missfits, anti-heroes, daredevils and treasure hunters sometimes its fucking awesome just to play a guy that unwaveringly fights the evil.

I may die. I may fail. People may get hurt. The fight is almost always unfair, the stakes unclear, the future uncertain. But with a Paladins training and the light within your heart the RIGHT choice is almost always clear as a cloudless day.

Before you ask sometimes yeah I am that guy that forces the party into a shitty fight out of guilt.

I also dump stated intelligence so my int is only 9.

>Party being sneaky
>hiding in building
>evil probably daemon mayor is trying to lure the party out by hanging civilians

>its a fucking trap
I know.
>we need more time to prepare
I know.
>innocents sometimes die, sometimes sacrifices must be made
I know.
>your playing into his hand
I know.
>are you going to fight them all yourself?
If I have to.
>you're going to die
maybe.
>you're a fool!
I know.

"I say a prayer, don my helm, pick up my shield and longsword, and walk out the door."

It's a simple choice desu.

Dragon blood sorcerer gets more hp and defense, wild magic seems .... More fragile and I dunno how well a melee wild would work, I'd need to expend a feat to wear light armor wouldn't I?

Unless a trap or hidden entity for some reason requires players to be unaware of it, like a Moffat monster of the week, then why would a failed perception roll cause any significant changes worth noting? It merely means they have are not aware of something. Now they might still encounter it, but then again they might not. Players don't always set off traps by their presence. If there are two doors, one is trapped, but they failed to notice the traps, the trapped door does nothing if they instead use the untrapped one. Unless some kind of magical nature to the trapped door has that as a conditional. But in that case, was the untrapped door really ever untrapped?

>Is crafting pointless?

Unless your DM has allowed magic item crafting, mostly yes. Rules for it are shite in 5.

>Also; I'm making a wild magic sorcerer, is he a stereotype Mage that sits from afar and casts all the time? Doesn't seem like he has many spells

Sorcerers play like wizards in that respect, but their big draw is metamagic. So they're more akin to a wizard who wants to conduct magic SCIENCE on the fly and twist spells more to their will. Both sorcs and wizards sit in the back and pew pew largely though.

>Can someone explain to me subtle magic? I can just cast a spel with no one knowing? Do I need to pass any checks regarding casting it?

Yes, it basically means you can stand there with your hands bound and mouth gagged and then suddenly the baddies explode with a fireball. Enemies do not normally get a check to notice though a DM could rule that especially magic sensitive/knowledgeable enemies, if watching you intently, might be able to notice. Normally no. Spell just magically happens.

>And twinned spell, what constitutes a target? I saw spells like ray of something I can't twin.

The spell must only be able to target one creature.

Is English your first language? Because you're making less and less sense the more you go on.

>You are using "passive" to mean a fixed degree, a known value
Which is how it's used in this game. If you have some private definition of it, that doesn't matter here.

>There is no reason for any of the stats to be considered more than the upper limits of what a character is capable of, but they can still fail
As far as I can tell this is complete word salad.

>It's okay to make an attack roll against a static AC, but it's not okay to make a Stealth check against passive Perception.
Why the double standard? In both cases you're using a single dice roll to represent two characters in conflict.

I don't think he quite meant it as a success. Personally I think the scenario he created is a ridiculous example because it relies on conditionals, but conditionals he pre-set up to ensure that the players are aware of something.

If you succeed the role you do acquire more information than if you failed, so he's arguing that there should be no such thing as a total failure. That's certainly a viable method, but hardly the way you always have to manage a story and it would be silly if you did. The railroad leads that way.

You would need a feat to do melee, but if you did do melee that class does not give anything you need to do melee well.

Fighters Paladins Monks Barbarians and rangers all get to attack twice at level 5 and use the best weapons. Sorcerers wizards and warlocks typically stay in the back.

If you want to cast spells and go into melee, I recommend a cleric, a pact of the blade warlock, a valor bard, or blade singer wizard from the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide.

Also yes the dragon sorcerer has more health and is beefier in general.

>FUCK YOU CANT BE POISONED
but you can be poisoned

I'm not certain English is your strong suit, actually. This doesn't require any advanced degrees to piece together what I am telling you. What is the upper limit? If a character has a Dexterity of 15 that is their maximum possible Dexterity. That's how it measures what a player is capable of. You cannot succeed on a roll of 16 because that is beyond the player's capabilities, barring any modifiers. How do you think injuries that reduce a stat are justified? Because they LIMIT what your player is capable of. All of this is outright stated in the players handbook in the appropriate sections.

I mean, I agree that the DM shouldn't design a situation where the players have to succeed at a particular skill check to move forward. Like, if the entire campaign is supposed to be set in motion by a PC noticing an obscure clue and it doesn't happen, then the DM should have planned for that possibility. But that only applies in extremely linear adventures anyway. And this should only prevent the PCs from getting stuck and not knowing how to proceed; it should not protect any of them from being killed horribly.

In most situations, total failure should be an option. If you attack you have a chance of totally missing. If you sneak around you have a chance of getting caught. This is risk.

Passive doesn't mean max value. Where are you getting your definition from?

you are immune to disease, not to poison.
it does suck to be a low level pally and getting frightened by stupid shit or overall not having your aura of protection and failing saving throws.

I'm a dwarf + lay on hands + aura of protection for con saves.

I guess thats not "can't be poisoned" but can't be diseased is a thing. You're right there is no immunity to poison anymore though.

Someone post the Sorcerer wizard comparison.

yeah only monks get immunity to poison

>purity of body is 10th level.

Jesus fucking christ dude.

>If you attack you have a chance of totally missing. If you sneak around you have a chance of getting caught.

Makes me think of something like, "Your attack roll failed. You miss the goblins torso completely and slash across its neck. Roll for double damage!"

Although critical failures ending up hurting the player happens, I've never seen a failure still hurt the target but I suppose a less farcical version of the above is if you are, say, attacking a goblin on a rickety bridge and the DM decides your missed attack hit the ancient role support and breaks it. Then you have to roll to see if you can grab the bridge. It fails and dies and you survive. Failure into success. Weird, but I guess that can happen.

Can you use lay on hands on yourself?

>If a character has a Dexterity of 15 that is their maximum possible Dexterity. That's how it measures what a player is capable of. You cannot succeed on a roll of 16 because that is beyond the player's capabilities, barring any modifiers

That is not even a little bit how ability scores work in 5e. If you have a Dexterity score of 15 and you roll a natural 20 on a Dexterity check, you have gotten a result of 22.

Did you start playing with AD&D? Because that's sort of how nonweapon proficiencies used to work. You'd roll a d20 and succeed if the roll was equal to or lower than your relevant ability score. If that's the case, your knowledge of the rules is like 20 years out of date.

If you feel like touching yourself, user

Dude.
Read the fucking book.

>tfw fall as a Paladin because you touch yourself several times a day using lay on hands.
>your deity blinds you.

it even applies to poison *damage* and not just the poisoned condition
it's gr8

This is a jumble of nonsense.

Demoman doesn't read books. He's had some bad experiences with a certain book in the past.

According to the wording, it would seem so. It specifies a creature, not a creature other than yourself

Does this mean at 10th level monks can't drunken fist anymore because alchohol can't poison them?

last DM I had was like this, pass the check or die, pass the check or get trapped in the room until someone makes the disadvantage roll to notice a poorly hidden door.

What's scarier than a drunk monk who can kick your ass?

A monk who can pretend to be drunk and kick your ass even harder.

I didn't know wizards printed drunken monk

wow those quirks are creepy

Lizardfolks are so cool, I think they are my favourite race now

looks like a fun party mate

>Those quirks
Playing as a lizardfolk might actually be pretty fun.

Has this been updated any time recently?

I also tend to do the druidic circle thing where when you are finished being raised by your master if you want to join the circle you have to kill a druid and take his/her territory because of RULES OF NATURE.

RULES OF NATURE, true nurtral, druids best druids.

Heaven forbid anyone posts the relevant section:

roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Ability Scores#content

Skill stats measure the magnitude. You know, the "extent" of something. You may have missed the bit about "barring any modifiers", though.

You don't have to trust the link, though you should. The same info can be found in the mega above.

Guys, need help. My party just played along to Strahd and pleased him really, really well with their willingnless to be corrupted.
They pleased him so well, he actually gifted them a magic longsword. It's cursed, of course, but I haven't decided what the curse is.
Can any of you help me? I want them to doubt whether or not use it - like, curse is bad, but weapon is good.

- Strahd can scry through it at-will.
- Any damage dealt to vampires or vampire spawn are instead dealt to the attuned creature.

Wow, you're dumber than I thought you were. If you were just an old grognard who assumed that ability checks hadn't changed since 1985, I'd have forgiven you. But you somehow read the current rules on how ability checks worked and reached a completely wrong conclusion not at all supported by the text.

This is actually kind of fascinating. Please point out where in the rules it says you can't achieve a result on an ability check that is higher than your ability score. No points if you move the goalposts and claim that you never said that; we can all read that you said that.

i always joke about touching myself in between encounters.

>If a character has a Dexterity of 15 that is their maximum possible Dexterity. That's how it measures what a player is capable of. You cannot succeed on a roll of 16 because that is beyond the player's capabilities, barring any modifiers.
wow, user.....

When slaying a creature with this weapon, make a dc 15 wisdom saving throw.
On a failure, roll on the insanity table for short term madness.
On the second failure, roll for long term.
On the third, roll for indefinite.
On fourth, short and long.
On fifth, short and indefinite.
On sixth, long and indefinite.
On seventh, all three.
And upon your eighth failure, your mind is torn entirely asunder by the dark powers that fuel the blade, causing the character to attack any creature it can see until it or they die. The blade, at this point, will mystically sustain them, so they are only allowed to fall in battle. Waiting will do nothing but endanger others.

are you the same dude? you still make no sense.

i've read that part of the rules many many times and still have no idea what the hell you're referencing regarding "magnitude" and "extent". the only thing that ability scores determine is your ability modifier.

What the fuck are you on about.
>If your character has a dexterity of 15 you can't succeed with a roll of 16

What does that even MEAN? If you mean that literally you're retarded.

Why bother to move to goalposts. It is clear you are either incapable or unwilling to understand what is being told to you. The scenario, as stated, and now you even have a link so you have no excuse of claiming ignorance. To help you out, though, in case you are capable of eventually understanding:

>To make an ability check, roll a d20 and add the relevant ability modifier. As with other d20 rolls, apply bonuses and penalties, and compare the total to the DC. If the total equals or exceeds the DC, the ability check is a success—the creature overcomes the Challenge at hand. Otherwise, it’s a failure, which means the character or monster makes no progress toward the objective or makes progress combined with a setback determined by the GM.

(Note that the above is from the link here in case you somehow missed it: roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Ability Scores#content Check under the section for ability checks)

So barring modifiers (this means they do not apply; and to pre-answer your question of why they possibly couldn't you can have bonuses and penalties cancel each other out - the same logic they used since the beginning of D&D still exists, all that has changed is the modifiers). you will indeed fail unless you meet or exceed the roll. Now do you comprehend or is this a lost cause?

I won't even get into Advantage and Dsadvantage. No need to confuse you.

We don't need the monster manual page on trolls. They're already here.

>and to pre-answer your question of why they possibly couldn't you can have bonuses and penalties cancel each other out
Lol

Well, you tried. At least we know is accurate.

How do you go from this
To that?
That's doesn't seem to be any logical process here.

Here you go, user:

>Each of a creature’s Abilities has a score, a number that defines the magnitude of that ability. An ability score is not just a measure of innate capabilities, but also encompasses a creature’s Training and competence in activities related to that ability.

You can find it under the section Ability Scores and Modifiers. "Extent" is just the definition of magnitude they're using, if that helps too. Cheers.

Dude what is your fucking argument?

Everything you're typing is a mangled mess, and I have no clue what you're trying to show.

this is not at all what you said in this post

Do you not know what the word "barring" means? Try "except for".

You'll notice (or maybe you won't because you're an idiot) that the DC of an ability check is not the same thing as your ability score. The two in fact have nothing to do with each other.

Here, have this, took me >9000 hours to make

The original argument, from
was that you don't agree with how 5e handles passive skills. Regardless of your opinions, you're still wrong. If the DC for a perception check is 15 and a character has a passive perception of 15, then they pass without having to roll.

Is that still what you're arguing about, or did it change?

Strahd can scry through it, of course
Matt Mercer came up with a really great idea for a cursed sword - basically, every hit, the target had to make a Con(?) save or have 1 point of its Strength transferred to the wielder. If the wielder ever got to 25 Str, the blade would empower and deal extra Necrotic damage until the next short rest. But, when the rest came, the power would leave it, and the now power-starved blade would attempt to eat the wielder's soul.

Some evolution of that, maybe. This is also very good.

We're talking about rolling for stats here. You know, like what you did when you rolled a Nat 1 on INT before replying.

all of which are in turn represented mechanically by the ability modifier. you're talking about the fluff behind the number here, so i guess we're just talking past each other.