/5eg/ - Fifth Edition General

>Dickass Wizard flings a fireball at the advancing party frontliners
>Metamagic it with widen spell, he fries himself to death

I like it
I like it

ass-imm-are?

Ahh - sim - mar

if the party has casters already, the caster on the right is better, has better utility spells so party casters can focus on nuking fuckers.

But how do you stop a sorcerer from just spamming prismatic spray all day long?

Ayy lmao

Actually, long story short, they're assembling a party from premade NPCs. So, those are the only casters they get.

I want to make a Pirate themed rogue. Any homebrews that aren't OP/stupid that you guys would recommend?

You don't

Just play a Swashbucker,

Just play the damn swashbuckler.

If only there was an official rouge archetype that fit that perfectly, perhaps a musketeer or maybe a swashbuckler.

DM thinks it might be OP because of Toujours l’Audace

How do I make a good Dragonblooded Sorcerer?

If he can't deal with an official class from an official supplement, what makes you think he'll accept some homebrew?

Just play a dex fighter or something.

Then it's battlemaster fighter for you.

Pathfinder got hooked up with Kingdom Death, what's D&D doing?

>pick fire
>pick fire spells
>get elemental adept
>pray your dm doesn't have you fighting daemons and devils

like that

>what's D&D doing?
staff is on vacations right now, so nothing

Is he looking at the UA or the SCAG swashbucker?

The SCAG variant fixed the "glitch" with the UA swashbuckler that let it sneak attack with greatswords and nerfed it a bit more.

Busy being a good game.

I wouldn't go that far. "Least likely to do any one thing poorly enough to be unplayable" is the descriptor I would use.

That's no excuse.

In what way?

Nevermind, of course you are looking at the UA one, the official SCAG variant has changed the name of the ability from Toujours l’Audace to Rackish audacity.

5egmegaanon.github.io/5etools/classes.html#Rogue,4

Use this URl to see the balanced version of the class.

Revenant Paladin/GOOlock multiclass it is then.

Would it awfully break anything if i just house ruled that critical hits do double damage? Rolling all those dices and counting that again bothers me more than it should.

Unrelated question: I want my rogue to multiclass into ranger BUT i dont want spells, since they dont fit the character - what would be reasonable to trade spellcasting for? I know Wizards have written about it in their article Modifying Classes ( dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/modifying-classes ), but isnt Combat Superiority a bit too strong?

1) Developers aren't pandering to furfags and weebs, which created a healthy, non-degenerate playerbase. Just look at our respective generals.
2) Caster supremacy fixed, mistakes of 3.5 design remembered - you can play your sword and board fighter and be contributing without crazy feat chains from obscure books.
3) Simple to play, I can introduce any of my friends to it in an hour, and they'll be creating their characters and having fun on their first session already.
Do I need to continue?

fucking poosted in the wrong thread i am bad
portmanteau/smash words..thing of perriwinkle, the purpley color, and wimp

Double damage on crits is fine

>Kingdom Death

While their minis are really high quality, I have neither the money nor the desire to drop hundreds of dollars on Titty Minis (tm)

If you don't include modifiers twice and only double the dice values it has the exact same average damage, so nothing really breaks. Your crits will be more swingy though.

Grab cool refluffable spells and live by it.
You're not casting hunters mark, you are focusing on a target.
Cure wounds > special healing herb.
Alarm > you have good instincts/you set a trap
Goodberry > you find some cool berries

And just keep on going like that. Almost all of the spell are refluffable to you doing nature or hunting stuff. If you can't refluff it, don't pick it and pick another option.

I was trolling, friend, I like 5e and 4e. But please continue, it's insightful.

>you can play your sword and board fighter and be contributing without crazy feat chains from obscure books.

this really hit home

Double damage is fine, just keep in mind that you'll get some really disappointing crits that way.

There'll be a huge margin when somebody rolls a bunch of 1s and somebody rolls max.

the thing everyone else said (ass im arr) or awesome R

Any idea why I can't upload a character sheet?

Want some help since the last D&D I play was when thac0 was a thing

That particular feature is called a knot.

4. Regular free first-party supplements that address common community complaints (like the UA Ranger).

Maybe have them deal your roll, or average damage doubled (whichever is higher). So you don't have "critical hits" that deal (1+Str)*2 damage.

Yeah seriously, I'm loving not having boobs shoved in my face

by which I mean I really like not having shit that the artist promptly jacked himself off on after makinginb4 go back to tumblr or some shit

Does Mage Armor stack with Unarmored Defense?

No, all armor calculations are separate.

Does Unarmored Defense work with a spell like mage armor? Unarmored Defense doesn’t work with mage armor. You might be asking yourself, “Why don’t they work together? Mage armor specifies that it works on a creature who isn’t wearing armor.” It’s true that the target of mage armor must be unarmored, but mage armor gives you a new way to calculate your AC (13 + your Dexterity modifier) and is therefore incompatible with Unarmored Defense or any other feature that provides an AC calculation.

dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/rules-answers-january-2016

Okay, thank you!

4) Devs of 5e actually seem to know what they're doing and respond to feedback (see revised ranger), as opposed to Paizo devs who... Well, picrelated.
5) Simplicity of monster statblocks makes it easy to prepare encounters and create your own monsters and baddies.
6) Bounded accuracy makes sure that you can use orcs on level 2 and level 15, as opposed to Pathfinder, where on high levels you stop playing a fantasy adventure and start playing Dragonball.
7) Have I mentioned that there is no Kitsune race in 5e? I know that I've already talked about it in my first point, but I feel like this needs a special mention.
8) Our monks actually work.

So what kind of artisan's tools would a gladiator have?
I'm doing a Battle Master

Whittling knife to make wooden phalluses.

No idea

What do you need help with

How can you possibly think mearls and Crawford know what they're doing after the last five unearthed arcana?

Mostly check if the basic have been done right. For example I simply could not find "holy symbol" anywhere.

>not understanding what playtest material is

Aside from unimaginative anti-undead and fey subclasses, bizarre kensai mechanics and twilight druid, I have no issue with new Arcanas. They're playtest material for a reason.

What's so bad about those UA?

If you can't upload, try a screenshot?

We'll hook you up (which probably means telling you each and every way you are wrong) and I'll probably give a 5e crash course if I have nothing better to do

I won't have anything better to do

You just need to dial way back on the autism for 5e. A holy symbol is just the symbol of your deity and you can slap it on anything you want - shield, weapon, codpiece, the bottom of your shoe, whatever. It just makes that item the thing you hold/touch/wield when casting a divine spell.

>Bottom of your shoe
>Smite fools by kicking them apart
nigga ur a genius

>Not tattooing an eyeball onto your hand so you can bitchslap the word of Vecna into people

Some of them are messes for different reasons.
People very quickly got tired of fey and undead subclasses
Twilight druid has a specific multiclass build that lets you deal over 1000 damage in a single round.
Arcane archer fighter was disliked because it felt too hit and miss.
Kensei is a big jumbled mess because it has two versions: as written in the UA, and a mearls tweet making it overpowered. It is either clunky and shitty or too amazing.
Both of the paladin oaths were evil and treachery is a perfect mix of too strong and cancerous to a normal party.

>Regular free first-party supplements that address common community complaints (like the UA Ranger).
This is actually important, Wizards is actually willing to respond to address community issues and complaints. Paizo just want an echochamber and hugbox.

1. Meh. I don't really care if the furfags have options or not.
2. Hahaha, no. The damage has been equalized if all fights start exactly 30 feet away, and the casters never cast AOE spells. Even then, casters have far more utility than martials. Caster balance actually got worse cunning from 4e.
3. True.

4. See The devs are hacks and there are numerous problems with the content they release. Purple dragon knights, berserker and battle rager barbarians, repetitive class design, etc.

5. No. Having actually run three game, I appreciate complicated monsters more, because they give you more ways to make fights interesting. 5e monster, combat, and encounter design are the worst aspects of the system, by far.

6. Bounded accuracy is good in theory, but also broken in implementation. The absurd bonuses to hit and AC that players can get do not work well in the system.

7. Meh.

8. Considering monks are the hardest martial class to make work, generally underpowered, and in the case of wot4e terribly, hilariously weak, you sunny know what you're talking about.

I don't even play of, but the willful blindness of your post, and pretending all the genuine flaws 5e has don't exist, annoys me. Hi Mearls!

I like 5e, but pretending it doesn't have its share of shit that DMs need to deal with to make it genuinely good, that's bad for the hobby.

Just started as a newbie and the rolls go so hard and fast I lost track of how some of these things work.

If I attack with a weapon I have proficiency in, that means I roll d20+dex for roll vs. AC, then for damage it's (finesse) weapon roll + dex bonus + level-based proficiency bonus, right? So proficiency bonus would be +2 for a level 1 rogue?

And for skill proficiencies, do you just test the skill or do you add the attribute as well? So I'm trying to convince someone to help us and have 4 persuasion and 14 charisma. Am I just doing d20 + 4 (for persuasion) or is it d20 + 4 + 2 charisma modifier)?

I'm pretty sure I understood it while making the character but I've lost sense of it again. Skill proficiency does my head in, because I know what I have proficiency in and what I have double proficiency in from Rogue stats, but that's translated into numbers on the skill sheet and I don't really remember where they came from.

Think fillable pdf was the problem

>Caster balance actually got worse cunning from 4e.
> balance
> 4e
Have you tried not being a nigger?

all rolls you are proficient with are exactly the same:
Roll 1d20+stat+proficiency

in addition to you do NOT add proficiency to non d20 rolls of any sort, unless specifically told to.

>Volo's Guide
>Hag section

Uhh, why does it keep on mentioning sexual remarks from the hag? More specifically-
Hags are supposed to value ugliness over beauty, so are these remarks going to be positive towards ugliness or are they just meant to be creepy because they're so ugly?

It's not that important, but I see a very different situation if it's the fucked up looking dude getting winked at or if it's the flawless supermodel.

Jesus christ those stat rolls

>It's not that important, but I see a very different situation if it's the fucked up looking dude getting winked at or if it's the flawless supermodel.
they'll both get winked at, ugly guy for snoo-snoo, supermodel to make them uncomfortable.

>not having twin brothers using the eye and hand of vecna as your BBEG's
why not, /5eg/?

Rolled 18 + 3 (1d20 + 3)

I roll wisdom to disbelieve.

So you add the stat modifier AND the skill number to your roll separately? This is what I'm confused about, I've got all these numbers in the Skills part of my character sheet, but I can't remember where the numbers came from (I used the handbook as a guide then a generator to get the sheet).

If my DM says "roll for persuasion", is that d20 + persuasion + charisma or just d20 + persuasion?

Just used the 4d6 pic 3 best that books says to use. That's it, the 18 is from the Tiefling +2 to charisma

Where can I get the fillable version of this sheet?

d20 + charisma modifier + proficiency bonus if you're proficient in persuasion.

>So you add the stat modifier AND the skill number to your roll separately? This is what I'm confused about, I've got all these numbers in the Skills part of my character sheet, but I can't remember where the numbers came from (I used the handbook as a guide then a generator to get the sheet).

Roll 1d20+stat+proficiency
your skill number IS stat+proficiency
so when rolling a skill you:
Roll 1d20+stat+proficiency

Roll 1d20+stat+proficiency

Not really - whoever wrote it put the bonus and the stat in the wrong place.
>case in point - str 3 but +16 bonus?

I just follow the links in the OP till I found a zip file with character sheets.

Who gives a shit about that, 13 is his lowest stat. How's that?

So, one of my players is running a Necromancer, and because I am relatively new and didn't know better at the time, I gave him access to the Necromancer spellbooks off dmsguild. Now, he:

-is almost always cloaked in the darkness spell
-has put black cloaks on his skeleton retinue so that he's indistinguishable from them without investigation.
-keeps an undead bat by his side that uses sonar and a psychic link to 'see' for the Necro.
-uses a spell that wraps a corpse around his body to absorb damage, making him much tankier than the standard wizard.

Thanks to his darkness, skeletal meat shield, and blindsight, he's very hard to kill. He's also my best, most dedicated player. With him, my PCs can't be challenged. Without him, they get stomped. The other PCs know this and seem to be starting to resent his character.

I've thrown the other players some bones to compensate (no pun intended), but group cohesion is fraying. We're close to the end of the story, and I want to finish without any more flareups than I've already had. The other players won't give the Necro the props he craves, and the Necro in turn sees no need to be a team player. The Necro has now told me he intends to sit out a future session so that the other players can learn to appreciate him a bit more after they get their asses stomped, but I'm not sure that will help.

So, my question is, how to I maintain party cohesion and see this campaign through to its conclusion? I can't nerf the necro now, and giving new shit to the other players hasn't helped much because they don't make optimal use of what they already have, and I'm not going to give them advice on that at this point, 9 months in. Should I let the necro sit out, watch the others get TPKed, and see if they come around to appreciating the necro? Is there a better alternative?

do kenku lay eggs?

Well 4d6 drop lowest averages 12 so you rolled unbelievably good

Lots of people write the bonus in the larger box, since it's the thing you actually care about

Take the responsibility, tell necromancer you're sorry and nerf him back to pre-dmsguild level.

Barbarian is so forgettable I forgot what was bad with it.

Bard: both classes are designed around ritual casting time features, that for some reason are on a once per long rest cooldown. This is a symptom of a larger problem 5e has, that many features are unnecessarily limited to discourage creative use of abilities. Compare the fighter in the playtest, which could use maneuver like abilities once per round to the battle master, which is lucky to average maneuvers once per battle, if you use the standard adventuring day rules. Back to the bards though: fey charming Bard is over powered, and scary bard is something that is almost better left to roleplay. And underpowered.

Clerics: protection was boring and underpowered, grave cleric is an overpowered anti undead (just inspired fluff!) Guy that's better at killing humans than undead due to necrotic resistance being common. The unsaveable vulnerability was poorly thought out. Forge clerics have great features early levels, but then are nothing but passives for most of the game.

Druids: fey druids are interesting, and I like that they experimented with a new type of cooldown that leaves it fairly available outside of combat. The downside is that it's another UA with a health dice pool type feature.

The anti undead druid just made me snore. You get the feeling that they're just copy pasting abilities from one UA to another at this point.

The fighter was full of ribbons instead of useful features, but the arcane Archer was okay. It kind of shares design Space with the battle master, but they did some interesting things with its maneuver like ability.

The paladin one was more overpowered stuff, though treachery did some interesting things with its design, and if tweaked could be good.

The monk was just a mess. Another health pool feature, and the most confusingly worded rules for kensai.

>-is almost always cloaked in the darkness spell
>-has put black cloaks on his skeleton retinue so that he's indistinguishable from them without investigation.
>-keeps an undead bat by his side that uses sonar and a psychic link to 'see' for the Necro.
>-uses a spell that wraps a corpse around his body to absorb damage, making him much tankier than the standard wizard.

a fireball will solve that relatively quickly.

You know how I can tell you never played 4e?

Thanks for your insight.

Surprise me.

The fillable pdf had it that way.
Then again who cares it is a d20 system it is an odd system by itself, so move along.

I did got lucky as balls.

4e was probably the most tightly balanced edition of dnd as far as players go, and monsters, while unbalanced at release were great too once the math got corrected.

An user just getting back into D&D after taking a break from 3.PF (and limited 4e) after burnout here. I know they added the Tieflings to core races in 5e since they added them in 4e as core to balance out the 'good' race of the dragonborn. However, I was always a fan of them being opposite to the Aasimar so my question is, where the heck are the Aasimar now? Do they just not exist in 5e as a character option or do they not exist at all anymore?

I'd fuck that dwarf.

Yes, and it was balanced to the point that every class felt like boring, samey bullshit. Sure, some of them were marginally different or more or less powerful, but if you're coming at me saying that fighter and swordmage are totally, fundamentally different, I'm going to laugh at you.