/5eg/ D&D Fifth Edition General

...

I am so goddamn pissed at how shitty rangers are. Seriously, why the fuck even put them in the game if you are just going to ass fuck them for three editions straight? Okay I admit they were slightly better in 4e but that would require me to actually play 4e, which no sane fucking person wants to do. Rangers aren't even second-line fighters anymore, they are fucking 3rd line skill monkeys that can't do anything right. They are worse than fucking bards. Now they are so useless they have full spellcasting to make up for how much shit they suck. Excuse me, I didn't see fucking Aragorn using spells. He didn't need any spells, except maybe lay on hands in that one part, which is a fucking paladin spell. In fact most 3.5 builds of aragorn I've seen have him pegged at ranger 1 fighter 3 paladin 2... so what the fuck? Ranger is so fucking useless that even the character who fucking DEFINED rangers can't be arsed to take more than one level in the goddamn fucking class that was fucking NAMED AFTER HIM.

SERIOUSLY????

I have more issues with ranger which I will cover in a minute.

>A post was posted, then another just like it

Top kek. They removed ability score requirements to cast spells? That's hilarious.

Wait, so I can play a 5 Int orc who can barely form a complete sentence but I can cast spells so long as they don't use attack rolls or saves? That's fucking awesome.

Also doesn't sleep allow a save? Or did they make it automatically put you to sleep with no chance to resist since 5e is caster edition 2.0?

That need an *INCREDIBLE* amount of setup, but yeah looks like that'd do it.

>They are worse than fucking bards

Bards are great though

If it steps on the toes, than that means a subclass is the best way to build it.

Example, take Sorcerer, look to Favored Soul and Dragon as examples. Favored Soul gives extra spells, which means you can give them a bit of extra nature and druidic style magic in addition to some of the Arcane and Elemental stuff sorcerers already get. From there, you can have those partial elemental/beast transformations be an option, either akin to picking one element like dragon sorcerer, or picking several different ones as you level like Totem barbarian.

It's the sort of thing that works perfectly as an Elemental Sorcerer.

Is this pasta?

I think it is, but on the off chance that it's not, read this retard.
media.wizards.com/2016/dnd/downloads/UA_RevisedRanger.pdf

Even base ranger is 500x more competitive than 3.0/3.5 ranger *EVER* was.

> new thread
> 16 posts in
> it's already filled with baits, trolls, and reactionfags

welp

I suppose that works

QUICK, TO MY COPY OF 3RD EDITION TOME AND BLOOD!

You're not helping

It's that time of day.

Cast Sleep. Roll 5d8. That many hit points worth of creatures fall asleep for one minute. Doesn't use your primary spellcasting stat.

You definitely need a minimum to multiclass but i'm not sure about starting out.

You don't need a minimum stat to start as a class.

No they aren't, all you had to do with 3.5 rangers was not put down your favored enemy until you actually started fightin shit, which was only fair because you would know in-character what were common enemies to fight, and the DM rarely noticed anyway. Mix this with rapid shot and two weapon fighting and against your favored enemy you were bad-ass. Still no candle to a true caster but not bad.

Also the revised ranger you posted is bogged down with useless features. Ever played a ranger? Half the group takes a shit on you if you want the spotlight for two minutes to go hunting or set up camp. "oh well travel's boring so we just gloss over ittt" says the nu male DM in his whiny drawl. Well fuck you cunt, I made a ranger, that's his fucking job. Fighter slashes shit like the meathead moron he is, wizard solves everything with a fucking spell, and cleric heals. Let me play my goddamn class. Oh look the game completely lacks any rules for hunting or survival! Yay! So even if you want a wilderness survival minigame, you have to homebrew (codeword for: you do the work, even though you spent a shitton for these books). So basically, rangers don't get to have any fun, they just get to sit back and be shitty second line fighters while fighter gets like 10 extra attacks.

You should take a short break from the internet for your own mental health.

Top kek. So 5e is basically completely broken. I can start out with literally 3 Intelligence, and be strategically outsmarted by a fucking nonsentient slime ball, yet I can still master the complex rituals of casting a fireball.

Holy shit that is retarded. Please tell me there is errata for this??

Hey guys! Virt's back! Stop taking the bait!

>No they aren't
K this is bait. Have fun bro.

When you run a game, make class prerequisites a house rule.

b8

but just, how long can you keep up the charade of only using spells with no save and still be effective?

Oddly enough the player in my game doing the ranger thing LIKES the 5e ranger, and HATES the UA Ranger.
As he says, he likes the ranger class for its utilities.

We homebrewed a quick switch so Primeval Awareness works more like a Paladin's Divine Sense rather than burning a spell slot, but otherwise he's been absolutely happy with the "stock" 5e Ranger.
He hates the UA Ranger because it's practically just a pure martial class now.

Pretty much forever depending on the build.
You don't get a save against wall of force, for instance.

> pointing out a critical failure in the system, is bait

No, it's called bringing up a legitimate issue. Did Wizards seriously fuck this up? And how do we fix it?

No. Because that doesn't fix it being broken in RAW and not making any goddamn sense.

Hell, a fighter with 7 Strength couldn't get away with being effective, but a wizard with 7 Int can? Looks like caster supremacy strikes again.

You've clearly never actually read the 5E players handbook or played 5E DnD before, but I'll humor you.

If you use point buy, your starting stats vary from 8 to 15 before racial mods, so the only way to have a 3 intelligence is to roll your ability scores.
You could be a sorcerer and cast fireball using charisma or a light cleric and cast it with wisdom and have a 3 intelligence and there would be no problem.
If you were a wizard with 3 intelligence you would prepare a number of spells per day equal to you wizard level plus your int bonus (minimum of 1) so with a -4 int bonus you wouldn't be preparing that many. Your fireball's dexterity save DC is 8 plus you int bonus plus proficiency, so most creatures would have no trouble saving for half damage.

So you would still be able to know fireball in your spellbook and maybe prepare it, but you wouldn't really be a master of it as a wizard with 3 intelligence. Sorcerer or cleric, no problem with low int.

A fighter with 7 strength and 16 dexterity is fine.

But... the revised ranger has even more utility than the PHB ranger. Are you sure you're talking about revised and not the 5-level scrapped ambuscade ranger?

You are bait.
Rule zero.

Jesus Fucking Christmas guys, stop taking Virt's bait.

Any word yet on what the next setting guide will be? Any chance of Dragonlance or Dark Sun?

> if you use pointbuy

Yeah your argument falls apart right there when I use 4d6 drop lowest like most gaming groups.

> You could be a sorcerer and cast fireball using charisma or a light cleric and cast it with wisdom and have a 3 intelligence and there would be no problem.

So? You could also be a mentally retarded wizard. This is fucking hilarious. My friend actually wanted to do this with sorcerer but with Wizard it's even better. Also, fuck using fireball, you can still cast magic missile.

Hey wait a minute.... if you can cast magic missile with a 3 Intelligence, why not teach it to ochre jellies in the dungeon? Actually, they should be able to learn it pretty easily. Actual literal non sentient undead can just spam the party with magic missile spells.

simantics.blogspot.com/2011/01/d-and-iq.html

According to this post an Intelligence of 4 is a 66 IQ. Stuff you cannot do with a 66 IQ... fucking multiplication and basic algebra. But you CAN cast magic missile!

So basically, casting magic missile is less complicated than multiplication. Yet wizards take years to learn it.

Wizards are even more retarded than actual retards.

Positive. We started gaming together long after that original "magic-free ranger" UA was released and specifically discussed the new UA Revised Ranger in comparison with the stock PHB Ranger, and he just feels that the stock Ranger is the more Ranger-y one.

I can try and go back through Skype logs to see exactly what he had to say, as this happened back when that UA was just released and my memory's not too fresh.

>Rolling stats
>Most groups

There's a magic-free ranger? Sauce? I would love to play that, even if it was shittier than the original, just so I don't have to play a ranger with spellcasting.

>like most gaming groups.
Citation or get the fuck out.

Check the multiclassing article in UA. There's a hastily slapped together spell-less Ranger as an example.

It's not very good.

The spell-less ranger as it's been printed by WotC thus far doesn't work when applied to the revised ranger, since it modifies things in a way that's no longer compatible.

Also it was just bad and spells are way better.
Just treat your spells as non-magical abilities if you'd prefer that kind of fluff.

>he likes the ranger class for its utilities
>He hates the UA Ranger because it's practically just a pure martial class now

...

Have either of you even read the UA Ranger?

Citation: go outside, instead of trying to find a game group on roll20 that doesn't flake before the first session.

You want me to find a study saying the sky is blue, too?

I don't know statistically for home games how many players roll for stats but point buy is the standardized way to get ability scores now. Especially for organized play and character portability. Or else you get people showing up swearing that they have a couple 18s and 17s that they totally rolled fairly.
Technically any character can take the magic initiate feat and learn magic missile, so you don't need to be a wizard or be intelligent at all to learn it.

Stop eating the fucking bait

The revised ranger isn't the spell-less ranger. It's got the same spell list and subclasses and general features, just rejiggered to be more useful.

No I meant like can you post a link?

>Citation: go outside, instead of trying to find a game group on roll20 that doesn't flake before the first session.
I did, in fact. We meet every Wednesday at a nice little board game cafe. And guess how many of us rolled for stats?

What fundamental limitations would you put on the oracle in Storm Kings Thunder? it's primarily there to answer questions about the giants but one of my players wants to ask it unrelated character backstory fluff

I'm mostly just annoyed that Sage Advice claims that you can't move while using Whirlwind Attack even though the RAW clearly says otherwise.

Why are they shit? They can consistently shit out damage with colossus slayer/multiattacks/hunters mark.

>can't google UA multiclassing
Do you need someone to wipe your ass for you too?

>Yet wizards take years to learn it.

Correction, the AVERAGE wizard takes years to learn it.

An intelligence 3 Wizard learning magic missile is basically on par with attempting to teach a dog complex calculus. Yeah, at a certain point you might drill in the rote memorization so that he can count his way through the problems, but it's going to take decades of work, rather than years for a normal person.

And instead of a dog, you're talking about a grandmaster wizard spending a decade trying to teach an Orc how to magic missile because he thought it'd be funny?

Most sane GMs are going to ask you to come back with a character that's actually believable, instead of 'lol that's so wacky XD'

Just know that the vast majority of spells are absolute garbage in the hands of such a mage, he won't have any of the other arcane knowledge a group typically wants a Wizard along for.

It really is like bringing along a Fighter in 3 strength and dex. Yeah, you can give him a shield and fullplate and have him trudge along super slowly, doing nothing except casting his eldritch knight cantrips and using his reactions for Protection fighting style, but why would you? Why should the rest of the party be forced to tag along with the special needs child?

dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/modifying-classes

I skimmed through it. Thought the loss of favored terrain was kind of a bummer. Thought the limitations on favored enemies at early levels were brilliant so you don't immediately have a dude ready to have bonuses at dragons at 1st level was pretty brilliant, but since my players have no interest in putting that build into play and I've got no games where I'm a player, I didn't check too thoroughly into it.

Have it ask for gold for every question, with a fairly high minimum and no maximum for the question asked.

Ignoring the top part and all the ad hominem he's not entirely wrong. My current DM doesn't even have fucking maps for us to look at in combat, let alone for travel. We just magically appear where we decided to go to (read:where he railroaded us to) so a ranger would lose out on his primary job. Since he doesn't know about UA, ranger is absolute garbage who contributes next to nothing. Its up to the GM to let ranger actually feel useful much moreso than with other classes and its a helluva lot easier to just do it by accident than with other classes.
If you wanted to fuck the caster over you have to actively put down anti-magic fields everywhere. To fuck with a ranger and make him feel useless you just have to forget to keep track of food.

You'd have the same problem in your game only *significantly* worse if you were in the same circumstance playing ranger in 3.5 instead. Which was my not-unclear point.

Nah that wouldn't work. The book doesn't account for anything outside giant questions, giving the players a quest to prove themselves before revealing specifics. Its meant to be a direct link to the god with divination magic.

The real question is would Annam the all father know/care about non giant things.

I don't know where you are getting this made up lore about archmages spending decades teaching dogs calculus or whatever. Some DM vetoing a character for no reason is nothing new, since That Guy always has a stick up his butt about whatever arbitrary worldbuilding that he already assumed.

A fighter with no combat skills can't really attack anything. A wizard with low intelligence can still attack enemies with magic missile or cast spells like fog cloud, haste, enlarge, magic weapon, etc. So they are not really the same.

I mean... There are rules about traveling in the 5E PHB & DMG. They're actually quite extensive. Food, water, shelter, time, foraging, drawing maps, navigating, tracking...
Admittedly, they're not fantastic, but there are rules.

It's just that, quite clearly for most players... it's boring to read, boring to follow, boring to play.

I think if you want a session/campaign with emphasis on survival, you just have to be sure everyone's OK with it.
But most players wont be, and most DMs aren't really interested either, from my experience.

>5 sessions
>still level 1

Low level D&D is fucking terrible

I've found gating questions with enormous constraints adds a cool element to how players interact with the questioner.

You do you tho senpai

You can always choose to fail a saving roll.

>5 sessions
>still level 1
How?

Boy, these are some really shitty arguments.

Let's talk about how you should be playing Monks instead.

Did your DM literally not have any monsters? Fighting almost anything gives you the exp to level up to 2.

The idea is fine but its about 12 questions too late. My only concern is the non story questions.

But if I let him get an answer I'll definitely make it have a cost/quest.

Is it just me or are monks played better as "tanks"?

>Not doing milestone

>DM hands us empty character sheets
>"hey what level are we starting at"
>one
>get up and leave

I know you only play fighter to hit things with a sword, but a fighter is just as hard to hit whether he has 3 str or 18, and he can still do a number of maneuvers that don't require a stat, and he can still cast eldritch knight stuff. So that's 2/3 options that are just as useful as a retarded wizard, and if anyone actually picks champion then I feel bad for them, because that's a fairly poorly designed and boring option

Okay. That's three or four of you. Whereas the five or six groups I have played with (that's right champ, five or six. I've been playing RPGs longer than you've been alive and been DMing since before your balls dropped) have rolled for stats. And so have 90% of the groups I have made contact with in other ways (I am very involved in the RPG community in my city and I basically control the local gaming situation). So I think I know a little bit more than you do, chump.

Tanks can also murder everything.

We have had one combat per session.

we've had three near TPKs, so they were high CR encounters (four CR 1/4 bandits + a dire wolf as the biggest one)

He divides the XP among the six of us. Pretty sure he's bullshitting us, he's definitely the type who doesn't like the players to have any real power or answers to any thing

This. I generally milestone up to 3 so players get rewarded for their initial adventuring and get up to having abilities to experiment with as things open up more.

Yeah maybe you could just post the link instead of being a tremendous douche about it?

I stopped rolling for stats halfway through 2nd Edition.

The only player I've had who picked champion picked it because he didn't want to have to remember lots of things.

I also never roll for stats in any of my groups, since we all have a consensus that it's toxic.

There's no such rule in 5e. When you're subjected to a saving throw, you roll the saving throw.

Tell your DM that this progression rate is not fun. Recommend another system.

What city so I can never go there?

>Okay. That's three or four of you.
7, actually.
>Whereas the five or six groups I have played with
Liar.
>I've been playing RPGs longer than you've been alive
Liar.
>and been DMing since before your balls dropped
Liar.
>I am very involved in the RPG community in my city
Liar.
>and I basically control the local gaming situation
Liar.
>So I think I know a little bit more than you do, chump.
You certainly don't know how to lie. I mean, this is like the Navy SEAL copypasta of grognard credit right here.

There is no class in 5e that requires you to remember an extreme amount of shit, atleast nothing that requires you to remember anywhere near as much shit as stuff in past editions did

maybe if you're multiclassed six different ways

>fighting one goblin in 20 different combats as a party of four results in the same XP as fighting 20 goblins at once
This is why the XP system is stupid.

Not true, 20 goblins at once is worth way more exp since it is a harder encounter. Have you ever actually read the DMG and built an encounter using the rules?

I agree but this inexperienced player looked at battlemaster and eldrich knight and decided they were way too complicated.

consider me triggered

Time to start abusing Animal Handling. Buy lots of dogs and have them fight for you.
Better yet, buy donkeys, they're more cost-efficient.
If you can use books outside of core, cows are even better.

Also, buy lots of oil and ball bearings and load up your livestock. Give them dispensers so everywhere they go they cover the ground with oil and marbles. And maybe your cows will also explode when the wizard casts Fire Bolt, but presumably that just deals more damage anyway.

Just put some effort into it, I'm sure once the DM sees you raising an army of burning farm animals he'll say "Okay, the players are finally taking the game seriously and they deserve a level up."

>20 encounters with 1 goblin equals 1,000 XP
>1 encounter with 20 goblins equals 4,000 XP
It should actually be closer then it is desu.

Story based is also a good way to keep them on track.

SKT, for example, allows massive amounts of freedom, I had players spend four sessions doing sidequests which was fine with me. But then they started wanting to level up and get new abilities.

Better do the main quest then.

You CAN make a save.

It represents an attempt to resist. Just relax, and let the magic of running away from the bard as fast as possible wash over you.

what do you mean by that