/5eg/ Fifth Edition General

Pretty much this >3 failed skill checks
PC falls, starts making death saves, if he passes he is just unconscious on an escarpment, can be rescued
>2 failed skill checks
PC falls, but manages to hang on to the edge, can climb back up or be pulled
>1 failed skill check
PC nearly falls but manages to balance himself on the edge, should move at half speed next turn to carefully move back

> Next class you're hoping for?
Warlord!

It's not heavy so small races are fine

In case anybody wants the rest.

Any kind of non-monk unarmed fighter will be an archetype, probably for barbarian or fighter like in 4e

>I'm making a "loot the ancient pyramid" one shot that I'll DM soon enough.
>Any tips? What can I throw at them except Yuan-Ti & serpents?
Giant scarabs/scorpions. Insect swarms, bonus points for locust or rot grubs from Volo's. Mummies. Yuan-ti Mummies. Crocodile/hyena mummies, maybe use their giant variants. Ape/baboon mummies/zombies. Kleer skeletons if you wanna get SERIOUS. Jackalweres? Lion golems & other living statues of sandstone. Maybe dust mephits? A bone naga if you want to throw in some spellcaster enemies. A sphynx of some kind if you want a higher level spellcaster, could make it a boss.

what the fuck a smart bard

While I understand, I feel like they miss some character archtypes by doing that. Dudley is not the same as Boxer. A pit fighter isn't the same as Holmes.
Also
MYSTIC
WHEN

wont happen m8
battlemaster is already an option

Stop forcing this shit.

Legit when is mystic UA coming out. Gimme a date and i'll stop until then.
Not that it actually matters. 1 pdf when we never reach max image limit and you can just filter it

Battlemaster is a shit replacement for warlord, and you know it.

So the central drawcard is the breath-weapon, right?

Maybe give 1/2 uses per rage? 2 cones of whatever a day seems a little underwhelming when compared to stuff like "halve all non-psychic damage."

I do like the capstone. A lot, actually.

>i wanna heal people
>no i don't want to be a caster for that i wann heal people with how awsum i am
It's a shit concept.

They can all be achieved with one single archetype, flavor is independent of that
A barbarian that fights with fists can be a pit fighter, a boxer or whatever

Sherlock holmes was a rogue with a couple of monk levels

And there is already a mystic UA, why do you keep posting that thing?

>And there is already a mystic UA
The mystic UA is crap. There's a reason why they're remaking the whole thing in, what, a months time.

How long do your sessions last, /5eg/?

We used to do 2-3 hour sessions, but we never got as much done as we wanted to. Lately, we've been doing 4.5-6~ and been having a blast.

Hmm, so up it to two additional uses when raging? Can do.

Generally three, because people have shit to do the morning after and frequently at least a half-hour of that is total chaff.

Around six hours, twice a week.

Urgh. Don't get me wrong, it's an okay idea. I'm just not a big fan of 'it's a monk but uses strength" for my unarmed types.
I'm willing to accept Monks because they explicitly run off weird supernatural energy that gives them magical.hands or some shit.

I like it. 3 checks seems a little excessive, but I suppose "lol bad roll you die regardless of your hp or climbing skills" is a little too gritty and realistic.

Archetypes are flexible. If anything I think we have too many classes as-is, so I'm all for diversifying through archetypes.

Want to be a boxer? Fighter archetype.
Want to be a brawler? Barbarian archetype.
A monk archetype based on grappling probably isn't too hard. "Add your enemy's strength modifier to your grapple rolls" would be nicely in-flavor but idk how balanced it would be.

and it's also covered by Rally which is pretty cool.

So again, no warlord for you.
Can you name a thing warlord did that battlemaster can't? Something that would fit 5e.

>twice a week

I'm impressed. We usually do our 6~ sessions every Friday. So, just once a week.

Don't wanna exhaust or burn anyone out.

But they are working on it, and mystic v2 is playable, that homebrew is a waste of time to even read

About 20 hours over 2 days, every 2 months.

Gow do you map a 15' cone to a grid?

>Want to be a boxer? Fighter archetype.
>Want to be a brawler? Barbarian archetype.

Pretty much this, there is no need for a whole new class when archetypes can scratch that itch

>I'm willing to accept Monks because they explicitly run off weird supernatural energy
I'm not going to get too bitchy but how do you suppose Barbarians and Fighters work? D&D is heroic/epic fantasy. It is all about being able to do outrageous and heroic acts by sheer force of will. Possibly not to hercules' level but damn close.

...

T shape

I am ripping this and making it a 4e theme, and you fuckers can't stop me.

Noob DM here. I've got a player who wants to play a monk with some lucha flair, so the Arena Royale seems great. I'm going to let him take it as his Monk Tradition, with a few alterations. In particular, I want to give him a Signature Maneuver at level 3, changing the existing one to Finishing Maneuver and leaving it at 17. Sort of like the difference between the People's Elbow and the Rock Bottom.

But I'm too inexperienced to be confident in making my own class features. Here's my stab at it: "Create a Signature Move, giving it a name and description. You can use spend one Ki point to use this move as an action on an adjacent enemy that's been knocked prone. On a hit, the target takes 2d4 (martial arts dice) + 1d4 damage for every 10 feet of movement you took this turn prior to attacking."

besides few metamagic feats is there any real reason to pick a sorcerer over a bard?

Hey /5eg/, new to the edition, got a couple questions about shadow monk:

Is the Mobile feat redundant on a class that's already super fast? It fits perfectly with the character and is less boring than something like Lucky.

Is the Monk capstone ability as underwhelming as I think it is? Considering dipping a few levels into rogue, even at the cost of Empty Body.

>Unearthed Arcana: Artificer
>Specialization: Gunsmith
>spells specialize in mobility, sensory enhancement, and illusions
>mechanical servant: polar bear, looks like a sword-wielding mechanical golem
>free magic items: Eyes of Night, Rope of Climbing, Heward's Handy Haversack, Slippers of Spider Climbing, Wings of Flying

We Titanfall Pilots in DnD now. Video related:
youtube.com/watch?v=ZJQlGNjJJ5A

>Want to be a boxer? Fighter archetype.
>Want to be a brawler? Barbarian archetype.

Those are fucking shit archetypes when stacked up next to shit like "Necromancer" and "Dragon Dude" and "Disciple of the literal Devil"

Oh nooooooooooo

But really, glad you like it enough to steal.

Mobile is good because it always makes you faster, allow ignoring of difficult terrain and allows attacking and disengaging in the same round.

Fair enough. I've just never been a fan of the "I want to fight unarmed, but I want no mechanical disadvantages for this" idea.

I feel like a true, vanilla martial Unarmed archetype would be a grappler at heart. Punches are perhaps the WORST way (short of finger-jabs or combat licking) to fight without a weapon. Compare punches to grapples, kicks, elbow strikes, eye gouges and the like.

tl;dr I want to see a Fighter archetype that's just 90% nut shots.

Fucking do it, my dude. Make sure the archetype or class has ways to knock prone, though.

I'd say mobile is worth it for the free disengage. Hitting and running is pretty good if you can afflict enemies with a status, or hit them with a manuever.

Hell, just run in, hit, then run behind the Polearm Master fighter.

And "I punch with my fists" is pretty shit compared to "I open a portal to my own private pocket dimension, with blackjack and hookers."

Some people like the martial shit.

For you maybe, but some people don't wanna fag around in robes or suck demon dick
Some people wanna be big guys and punch shit on the fucking mouth

>I feel like a true, vanilla martial Unarmed archetype would be a grappler at heart. Punches are perhaps the WORST way (short of finger-jabs or combat licking) to fight without a weapon. Compare punches to grapples, kicks, elbow strikes, eye gouges and the like.
I'm fine with this. Make one archtype that is pure punching with big ol haymakers, one that works on counters and sweeps and such, and one pure wrestler either lucha or professional flair.

>d4 damage

When will this meme for non-Monk unarmed fighters end?

>When will this meme for non-Monk unarmed fighters end?
When 5e stops being aimed at being heroic fantasy. So never.

It makes sense to me. You punch another person, sure it's gonna hurt, but unless you're a professional boxer, you're not really in any danger of seriously hurting them. Now, if you go up and try and punch some of the shit that adventurers fight, you're not gonna do a whole lotta good. Like, go up and punch a cow one day. They probably won't give a shit.

It scales at the same rate as monk

Wait you want to be better at unarmed combat (and combat overall because better fram) than a monk? fuck off, or improve monk too

From the look of it it gets better with levels, and you can't expect a novice adventurer to be crazy good at punching from the get-go, especially when punching is normally just 1 damage

You also have to consider it is a barbarian so it will end up being 1d4+STR+Rage, which is more than a monk does

So a lot of Bards play music to cast their spells.

For something like Vicious Mockery, I imagine that is not the case?

Thats kind of awkward

So, the action/ki-free disengage is great, and enables easy hit-and-run tactics. That's cool, thanks for the help.

5 squares at the middle of a square, 9 only if your DM is generous.

4 squares at a grid intersection.

It only has V component. So no, it doesn't require them to play music.

Speaking of Vicious Mockery, is it a good cantrip or is it shit?

>A man can attack 9 times with the largest sword a man can wield after running 30 feet to an enemy in 6 seconds
>A man can summon creatures from other planes, spawn fireballs and icestorms, and control the minds of others like puppets
>A man can channel the powers of an active god that counsels them in times of trouble and gives them the powers to heal
>A man cannot become good enough at unarmed combat to contribute similarly
Realism is pointless. Internal consistency reads "people become supernaturally skilled at their heroic exploits" and unarmed fighting and the use of a bare body as a weapon is a classic archetype.

People will tell I'm shitposting or baiting or whatever, but yes, monk in general is slightly underwhelming unless the only thing you expect of him is stun stun stun stun, for everything else ask other party's members help

Way better than 3.5 though but worse than 4e

user, you can call somebody a faggot so hard their brain hurts.

its great

Hey someone actually saved my stuff, neat

It's hard to move away from tradition, and traditionally unarmed sucked in D&D. If you don't use feats unarmed damage is ok, if you use feats it's laughable but at least you can stun.

Nah, a man can do that. 17th level Monk is doing d10's of damage. And a 17th level Monk is different from a 4th level Fighter that took Tavern Brawler. Makes sense.

Not like ; that's too many squares. It's "One square, two squares, three squares". When you're shooting it horizontally its "square in front of two, two squares with one to your left/right, three squares in a line in front of you." When you shoot it diagonally, it's "one square diagonally, two squares diagonally, three squares diagonally". For the one shot at an angle with one side verticle (the top left on the diagram), it'd be "one square, two squares (one to the left), three squares (two to the left)".

Does that help you?

if you are a bard and you don't pick up vicious mockery, you're dead to me.

What attack spells do fire or radiant damage. I plan to multiclass warlock undying light

>>A man cannot become good enough at unarmed combat to contribute similarly

A man can.
By Monk levels.

Sadly everybody else's is dealing 1d10+10 at that time

justplayamonk.jpg

The ones in Light Cleric spell list

I've run across a bit of a problem. I'm running a modern campaign using 5e. Hammered out enough details to the world to run and came up with my own firearms that would be more balanced with the existing melee weapons. We convened to make characters and do session zero on Monday. Then the artificer came out and one of my players made one, going into gunsmith. The rub is that the thundercannon, at its base, is slightly weaker than the rifle I already came up with (2d6 vs 3d4). What do?

>A man can punch hard enough with one of his bare fists to cause damage comparable to that of a great maul, a weapon that the guy that attacks 9 times has to hold with both hands

Punching with the strength of an actual sledgehammer isn't enough for you?

way to miss the point

"Guy who is also a dragon" is way more character-defining than "Guy who still just beats things to death--but with his fists this time"

It's not about magic vs. martial or power levels, some archetypes say a lot of cool shit about your character and "punches more good" is a wet fart

Do you think we'll ever see a new setting in 5th edition?

Everyone's so busy jacking themselves off over old settings that I feel like 5e would burn from underneath them if Mearls had the balls to release a new setting before first updating literally everything else ever published.

And monk is doing 5d10+25
Are you an actual retard? Or just think kenshiro is a valid thing to aim for in DandfuckingD?

>is slightly weaker

only slightly? Then it doesn't matter. Besides, it's the same damage on average.

Also, check out the UA modern spells

Speaking of which, I need to create an extensive list of insults for all sorts of races. Cant be unprepared.

Lets start with Dwarves.

They're different roles. Bards get almost no good offensive spells except for those few they can steal with Magical Secrets. The only offensive cantrip they get without wasting a feat or a magical secret is Vicious Mockery, the weakest damage cantrip in the game. Though bards can bleed into the sorcerer's role a little bit, bards are mostly for support and utility, and the fact that they CAN take the place of a cleric usually means they kind of have to.

And don't treat all metamagic feats as equal. The two important ones are Quicken Spell and Twin Spell. Twin Spell is fun as hell as it lets you effectively concentrate on two spells at once.

>new
>5th edition

NNNope

why not create one, user?

The Kensei was created to give the Monk a big damage GWM users so Monk isnt just a moderate damage guy that puts riders on his attacks.Monks pretty much have an archetype for everything nowadays and are at least moderately good at it [Save E monk and LD]

Again, for you

In my personal opinion "guy who punches things into next tuesday and subjugates the mightiest of beasts with his bare hands" is much cooler than "sword dude" or "dragon sperm collector"

You're saying the idea has no merit solely based on your subjective opinion, which is a retarded premise

No, the retard seems to be you, monk doesn't have 5 attacks, that's for starter, and monk can't use GWM or SS (where the +10 comes from), so next try to read, then reply.

But if you prefer
Monk deals 1d10+5 at the veryveryvery best
Rest deal 1d10+15 with more chances of adding a +1 from magic items to all their attacks while monk has almost none

But, when the ranger starts getting multiple attacks, he's completely outdoing the big class feature of the artificer.

>The Kensei was created to give the Monk a big damage GWM
Sadly if he wants to also have Defense, they don't deal much more damage, charts say they deal like +5 compared to a normal punchy monk, and that's pitable, a barbarian, ranger or a paladin deal double what a monk deals. A fighter can even quadruple what a monk deals.

It's very good. Applying disadvantage to an enemy's attack makes them miss quite often.

At least 4e made monks good, too bad the industry is allergic to change.
The problem is that a level 17 tavern brawler fighter is still doing 1d4.
I love monks and the archetypes they represent, but sometimes other classes are a better fit for certain unarmed archetypes, especially anything using strength. A street boxer, a fighter who's a master of martial arts but not mystical self improvement/enlightenment, a raging windmill of fists and muscle, etc. The fact that monks are the only unarmed class is insufficient.
I'm fine with the scaling that monks get, they get more utility than raw power, as they aught. Concepts that don't fall under monk fall behind, because the monk class has very flavorful abilities that imply someone who meditates and masters enlightenment and power of self, mind, and body, who can punch (or use small weapons) as a result of this training of inner strength.

meh, that may as well be, as I don't have the artificer in front of me right now, but on the flip side, just consider how the ranger is shit anyway, so it might as well gets it consolation prize of damage

Alternatively, you can let the gunsmith apply the Crossbow Expert feat to the artificer

>5d10+25
Citation needed

Also is pretty fucking clear the other user was mentioning greatweaponmaster but I guess you couldn't even get that

Aren't radius attacks always made on a point on the grid? So it would be 4

Realism is not a single all-or-nothing thing. Different genres have different, separate unrealistic conventions for which they ask the audience to suspend their disbelief. For example, comedy, action, and horror movies are all unrealistic, but no two are unrealistic in the same way.

The conceit that armed and unarmed combat are equally effective (in which case why would anyone ever bother with weapons?) is native to superhero comics and kung-fu movies, and not even all of those. Western fantasy RPGs, and the fiction they're based off of, run on an entirely different set of conceits.

Do you an image?

So this artificer pet, you go polar bear right? Also I don't see it scaling in any way so it's useless past level 10 or whatever?

The fuck are you talking about?

Most damage comes off the +10 and they only use Dex even for 2HWs so theres no reduction in anything. You get the same two attacks with GWM almost everyone else gets and could gets a pair of extra UA attacks to tack a little more on