/5eg/ D&D Fifth Edition General

>How do you feel about odd archetype concepts for different main stat classes, such as INT Barbarian or STR Wizard?

Wisdom fighter is neat. Human var. w/ Magic Initiate(druid) for shillelagh. Don't need strength and only need 14 dex to use medium armor well.
If you pick up PAM at some point, then your damage gets pretty damn good too.

Basically turns you into a SAD ranger who's better at fighting but basically doesn't get spells.

No. You can get away with practically anything as long you roleplay it well.

Change the phrasing on the third Runic Weapon benefit.
>You learn two cantrips of your choice from any class's spell list. These cantrips are ranger spells for you.

The level of exhaustion just seems mean, especially if your DM is even a tiny bit of a dick. If the DM knows how badly you'll be hobbled by a broken or stolen weapon, then (s)he is gonna have that happen every once in a while.

Plus, there aren't fixed rules on how hard it is to break weapons, especially when someone's holding it. Do you make an attack roll against the object? What's its AC? Is it the same as what it'd be if it was just lying there or does the wielder impact that? Is there a saving throw involved?

Et cetera. I'd just take that out.

The 5th level feature is either Extra Attack or something which takes the place of Extra Attack. Do you think "if you spend one of your limited spell slots you can do a little more damage with the feature you can use three times per short rest" is equivalent to "every single time you use the Attack action, do it twice"?

Only two of the Rune Arts deal any kind of damage unless Overloaded. Does Rune Shield work on any of the others if you don't Overload them? It's pretty good otherwise (it reinforces the conclave's features, and ever-changing resistance is a neat way to approach the ranger's 7th-level defensive feature) though I gotta put an asterisk there because I think there is quite a bit that you should change about the Rune Arts feature, which might mean some tweaks to Rune Shield in turn.

You should be able to use Interference whenever either you or a friendly creature is targeted, not just yourself. Also the point of origin for some spells (like cone spells) is already the caster, so you're gonna need to change that wording. Or why not just something like "you can spend a use of Rune Arts to cast Counterspell without spending a spell slot"?

The Rune Arts are the biggest problem. I'll get to them next.

Constitution is not a spellcasting ability. Stop it.

Blood magic pls go and stay go

Not that user, but I like the concept of a con-caster, however out of a witch/shamanistic point of view.

Most notably, scarred witchdoctor from Pathfinder.

I'll response to everything after your next post/critique. I think you're the same user who helped me with the Fey-Blood Sorcerer.

What is "the Overload effect"?

I think something to replace the extra attack would be "Choose fire, cold lightning, acid, poison or thunder. Once per turn, when you attack with your runic weapon, deal an additional 1d10 damage of that type. When you finish a long rest, you can change the type of damage."

What's the best way to take advantage of fast hands? Is there any use for the sleight of hand as a bonus action part?

If you scroll down, there's a second page with the runes and Overload effect.

Oh, there was a second page.

The rune arts don't say how long they last.

Secretly masturbating someone else.

Stealing something on their person

Subtle spell via mundane means? If you cover your mouth with a mask at least.
Reverse pick pocketing gas/oil/explosives?
Poison needle poking the target without the guards seeing?

I should probably change the wording to "On your next hit". The intent was for them to last a single turn, but perhaps I should make it last two turns instead? Something like the Samurai, "Until the end of your next turn"?

So in our last session, with the reaction resulting from placing a bag of holding inside another one, we destroyed a castle.
In our scurry to get away from there, the wizard tripped and ended up losing his legs.

Considering we have no access to Regenerate, what do?

Strap him on the strongest party member's back. Hodor.

The Rune Arts are sorta all over the place, man.

>Rune of Flame
From 5th level on, that's weaker than a cantrip, and you can only do it three times per rest.

>Rune of Phantasm
>ignore any AC bonuses the creature has aside from what they'd have from their Dexterity modifier or Natural Armor
So many things here. First of all, I get what you're going for, but in game mechanics terms that's nonsense.

You're forcing the DM to make calculations on the fly. "Okay, so their Dexterity modifier is +2, so their AC is 12" isn't a BIG calculation, but it's annoying and it adds up. Also most enemies have natural armor, so if you keep this, it should affect natural armor.

More damningly, though, that bonus usually isn't much bigger than gaining advantage on the attack roll would be. So again, this isn't really better than a cantrip but it's much more limited.

>Rune of Frost
>Rune of Draining
These are okay. They're roughly equivalent to 1st-level spells (Rune of Draining to False Life, Rune of Frost to a weaker version of Shield of Faith). Though without the Overload, I don't really get how "hit them with a weapon attack and get +1 to AC" ties in with ice.

>Rune of Steel
>Rune of Fervor
Much, much more useful than the others. Would you rather do 1d8 (average 4.5) damage to one enemy with Rune of Flame or would you rather do 5 damage per turn to every enemy within 10 feet for a minute? Would you rather reduce the enemy's chance of hitting by 5 percentage points with Rune of Frost or decrease the damage you take by 17% with Rune of Steel (for a Medium creature with a 2d6 weapon and 20 Strength--it's more for weaker attacks)?

If I were you, I'd probably reshape the Rune Arts from the ground up in a way that reinforces the ranger-as-arcane-spellcaster dynamic. Make it a benefit that activates when you cast a spell like the Favored Soul's self-healing deal, except stronger and more versatile to compensate for the ranger's much smaller reserve of spell slots.

Strap him to a stick.
Have the barbarian hold him.
Refer to him as the staff of fireball.

I don't believe I am.

Why would a mid-to-high level wizard ever need legs?

Does the natural weapon granted by Alter Self count for sneak attack, and can I use dex as my attack stat with it?

Get you a scroll of unseen servant.
Have the wizard craft a magic item that creates a servant to act as his missing legs.

It does not appear so. You're making an unarmed strike, which uses Strength unless you have the Martial Arts class feature. Sneak Attack requires the use of a ranged or finesse weapon.

Alright, I appreciate your critique and this has given me some good ideas on how to tweak it. My original idea was to have EK's War Magic(or variation) at 5th/7th level and place Overload higher up. But I felt at the time that making Overload come so late into the class made it overall not worth having to begin with.

Should I make Overload stay at 5th level after redesigning the Rune Arts and make the 7th level War Magic?

Yeah, that's what I thought.

Since alignments are apparently important to my new DM

A Changeling Rogue who wants to climb from the slums and claim the throne by any means necessary, be it assassination/deception or intrigue/politicking.

Chaotic Neutral, Neutral Evil? I'm not quite sure what, but he wants me to put down one.

Why do they want the throne, what will they do with it? Rule with an iron fist, destroy the kingdom from within, or just for the heck of it?

Chaotic obviously, any means necessary is basically that. As for the rest

Neutral is looking out for number one.

Evil is looking out for number one and then raping number two's wife to make sure he knows who's number one.

Which is he?

Frankly, I don't think Overload IS worth having to begin with.

War Magic could work for the 5th level feature, but you'd have to really hit hard on the archetype making the ranger more spellcasty. Maybe give three cantrips instead of two, for a start.

For the ranger, the 11th-level feature is usually Extra Attack But Not Quite (Volley, Whirlwind Attack, the beast master's version of Whirlwind Attack).

Depends why he wants to take the throne.

> any means necessary is basically that.
No, that's Evil.

That seems kinda short sighted for a changeling. I mean he's going to be found out eventually by virtue of not being able to have kids/have the same political skill or fancies that everyone's going to know the king for.

Is the reason he wants the throne just?

Lust for power=chaotic evil
Thinks he can do better with a shitty kingdom/he's the only one that can change it given the current climate=chaotic neutral/good
Thinks being a king would be neato=neutral evil

Lawful - Follows a code, whether it's personal honour or the law of the land/an order.
Chaotic - Does what he feels he wants to.
Good - Willing to help others and take some detriment (whether minor or large) to himself in the process.
Evil - Helps himself even when it's detrimental to others.
Note that any alignment can still have friends and loved ones. They mainly affect how you interact with strangers.

Chaotic is the ends justify the means, lawful is the means are just as important. He doesn't care how he becomes king, just that he does.

Alright, so make 5th level War Magic, entirely nix Overload and replace it with something else. Maybe making the 11th level something that has to do with exploding effects?

>finally looking up bkub

holy shit nigga, thems some hard to deciper references.

That could work.

Alright, thanks user. Time to get to work. Flavor/fluff wise, does being a Runeseeker/gish fit the Ranger archetype?

Sure.

By the way, they're "conclaves" now.

Conclaves it is, thanks.

So I've gotten myself into a bit of a pickle with one of my players, and I'm hoping I can get a bit of help to solve it.

I previously told the players that most classes from 3.5 can be ported over to 5th edition with little/few changes, thanks to a combination of archetypes and slight homebrew. Well, one of them wants to play as a Swordsage from Book of Nine Swords, and for the life of me I can't seem to figure out how to do it for this person, either as a homebrewed port or a mix of feats and classes.

My initial thought was to just say, "Use GFB, BB, etc., and play as a Bladesinger, EK, or Warlock" but while that solves some of the mechanics, it doesn't fix all of them. Now, based on the class in 3.5, I'm trying to figure out how to port it over, and which class in 5e has a decent backbone/structure to it that would allow this to occur.

The closest thing I can think of is the Monk as a backbone, tweaking what weapons are allowed, and then saying Ki is used for the various maneuver abilities.

I don't want to just tell this player no, because he's willing to work with me on it and is fine with on-the-fly balance changes, but I'm at a loss.

my campaign's clerics are more like holy power channelers, they use con instead of wis. makes dwarves the primary god-botherers of the campaign compared to the elves arcane talents.

I kind of feel like the monk would probably be the closest though I've never played any of those classes. It also looks like if you get any more complicated than just giving him the weapon he wants and taxing him a feat for it, it would get way too weird.

I'd ask him what he liked about swordsage, and allow some homebrew items/feats that got into the core of that with an existing class.

>Reverse pick pocketing
It's called planting.

I don't know anything about Swordsage, other than "unarmed swordsage= playable 3.5 monk." With that said, you did say "most classes," so maybe just a monk. Look at the archetype options, and they can use weapons.

That makes dwarf clerics and clerics in general ridiculously op

Wis would be kinda fine for your flavor, if you think of it as the ability to recognize and concentrate on the holy power

But lifting the limitation on clerics to need both, high wisdom for spellcasting and high con for being tanky and maintaining concentration, which is pretty important to clerics, especially for frontliners, may break the game, or at least ruin it for other classes

What are the core things about a Swordsage's feel?

>I can shut down enemies with spells AND never die in my heavy armor and behind my shield?
>Sign me the fuck up!

I played a transexual Arabian duelist once, so I'd say yours is at least less-weird than that.

I haven't played 3.5, but is swordsage literally just a guy with light armor and martial weapons that uses some magical maneuvers? In that case I think the best way to go about it would be to mod the battlemaster. (Or maybe even the arcane archer?) Change the maneuver list for more magical effects. Give them some magical stuff for the other features like detect magic or identify, maybe evasion.

You'd better reduce the Cleric to d6 hit dice if you're doing that. At minimum.

Swordsage was originally made to be a fixed Monk class for 3.5, along with the other two classes in the book (Crusader = Paladin, Warblade = Fighter). It was meant to be a light armor wearing class that would deal damage based upon using various maneuvers (aka "weeaboo fighting magic") to hit, deal weapon damage and some form of elemental damage, and then back out without provoking an attack of opportunity. They also had various stances they could enter, usually to provide a bonus to AC or let them move about the battlefield without provoking attacks of opportunity.

I've looked.

I'm tired of looking, googling, reading

where are size rules.

Heavy. Small creatures have disadvantage on attack
rolls with heavy weapons. A heavy weapon’s size and
bulk make it too large for a Small creature to use
effectively.

Aside from the races speed and physical size and weight occupying spaces - and special rules such as heavy

there are no other size rules?

No. Some abilities specify "creature of size Large or smaller" or "creature smaller than you", for example, but there's nothing general AFAIK.

So sounds like a monk (you can already use ki to Disengage as a bonus action) with a homebrew Tradition that lets you use some Stances.

I'm looking to DM a game for my friends. None of us have played D&D. Any tips? Been watching videos about it on YouTube, particularly Matt Colville's channel.

I think it has them in either the Monster Manual or the DMG, since it includes some size-related guidelines in the DM Basic Rules.

But there aren't many size-related rules, especially on the player side. The only one that comes to mind is "you can move through the space of a creature two sizes larger or smaller than you".

here, after reading some of the another anons who talked about Swordsage. My thinking is to make it a Monk archetype and combining it with other features the Swordsage class had back in 3.5. Here's what I've come up with so far:

>Martial Training
At 3rd level, you gain proficiency with all martial melee weapons, and they are treated as Monk weapons.

>Maneuvers
You learn two maneuvers, special weapon techniques that are only possible thanks to your mastery of Ki. As you gain more Monk levels you may learn other maneuvers. Each maneuver requires the use of Ki. Refer to the maneuver itself to see how much the technique costs. (I then have to port over/balance out the Swordsage maneuvers for 5e, draw upon inspiration from Battlemaster Fighter maneuvers).

>Quick to Act
At 6th level, you gain a +1 bonus to your initiative count. This increases to a +2 bonus at 11th level, and a +3 bonus at 17th level.

>Sense Magic
At 6th level, you gain the ability to cast Detect Magic and Identify as a ritual.

>Weapon Focus
At 11th level, you gain increased proficiency and expertise with your Monk weapons. You gain a +2 damage bonus with all Monk weapons.

>Weapon and Body
At 17th level, your weapon truly is an extension of your body. Whenever you hit a target with one of your maneuvers that use Ki, you regain 1 Ki point.

Trying to find a character app for android.

So far ive downloaded squire, 5th edition character, and d20 character sheet.

Where are the import files for squire found? Its got the neatest layout but its severely limited to what i can do.

5th ed character has more options but again is quite limited.

D20 sheet doesnt seem to allow multiclassing but does everything else fine.

Anyone have a pdf of Legacy of the crystal shard?

Check this one out for comparison merovia.obsidianportal.com/wikis/swordsage

Also, I think the problem with using ki for maneuvers might be that they compete for resources with the base class (like Wot4E), while battlemaster gets resources completely on top of what the base class offers

need some help for ideas

gonna give my level 1 players some funny magic music instruments since they are a "warband"

Bagpipes of invisibility
drums of
Ukulele of
Something to be used for singing
Tambourines of

You seem to be lost friend. /pfg/ is a different thread.

>Ukulele of Shrinking

Whilst playing you reduce from Medium to Small to Tiny, at which point it is large enough compared to you to legally be considered a guitar, so stops working and you grow back at the same speed.

>At 3rd level, you gain proficiency with all martial melee weapons, and they are treated as Monk weapons.
DANGER WILL ROBINSON
You're letting the monk use a greatsword with Dexterity, plus make an unarmed strike afterward, starting at 3rd level.

I don't think it'd be the end of the world to let the monk use d8 weapons as a Tradition feature, but then you'd need to phrase it "You can use either simple or martial weapons as monk weapons, but must abide by the other restrictions listed. If you use a weapon with the versatile property, you cannot gain the benefit of this feature while you wield it in both hands."

The alternative--which I would not recommend, since I think it would require more complicated rules--is taking away the free unarmed attack as a bonus action.

You could probably give Detect Magic at-will at 6th level.

Wot4E's abilities are horrendously over-priced for their effect. I'm still working on the pricing for these maneuvers and converting them for 3.5 to 5th edition, but my initial guess is to make the maneuvers themselves only cost 1-3 ki.

Only if you make it weird.

For the 3rd level weapon proficiencies, what about limiting it to specific ones that make sense for the archetype (and what I am basing it off of): all the one-handed martial weapons?

That's fine, too.

drums of beatboxing

Listening to the sound of this drum and succeeding on a dc 15 perception check you realize, it doesn't really make the sound of a real drum but rather just play a recorded particular skilled beatboxer imitating drum sounds

Microphone of blasting.
open5e.com/equipment/magic-items/horn-of-blasting.html
Imagine one of your players trying to start his song and the microphone immediately exploding, putting him into a bloodied state.

>not bagpipe of absolute annoyance/terror

Drums of marching, ukelele of... Something. Morris Tambourines.

There's nothing wrong with using Ki for the abilities. The wrong thing with the Wot4E is that it gets nothing else. Level 3 should be "you learn disciplines. At these levels learn more." Then level 6, 11, and 17 are all free for real benefits.

Please someone, anyone.

New-ish DM here. Was wondering on others' opinions on the optional Flanking rule from the DMG.
Now, most of my players have come from Pathfinder (even though I'm not really a fan of it), so they expect to get something out of flanking.
I was running with it at first, but after they absolutely demolished the boss I set before them earlier, I'm starting to think that giving Advantage on Flanking might be way too fucking much. I had to buff the boss twice during the fight to compensate for everyone mobbing around it.
How would you guys do it? Disable it altogether? I've thought about reverting the Flanking rule to how it worked in previous editions: a +2 to hit.
I do feel like my players should gain something from clever positioning, but I don't want it to feel flat-out broken as it did to me. Thoughts on this?

You should be careful running single enemies at all. Players can just shove them to the ground and hold them there.

Advantage is honestly too much, considering you can't stack advantage.

I honestly wouldn't give any real bonus unless you completely surround something, and even then you have the advantage of having more turns than them.

Paladin who feels the strong should rule the weak, the feeble shall, and will yield.

However, it is the responsibility of the strong to cultivate and protect the weak under his service, as they are but sheep living amoung wolves.

He owns slaves and is will contently reprimand them if needed with whips or other means of punishment, however he would also fight without hesitation to protect them against anyone causing them harm or bother, as they are both his possession and his responsibility.

He would happily leap forward to save villagers from bandits, as he knows they are too feeble and pathetic to save themselves, he is a wolf among sheep. He asks no reward, but also adores being praised as a hero so the act is not entirely selfless.

Lawful Good, Lawful Neutral, Or Lawful Evil?

The benefit from flanking in this edition is free rogue sneak attacks and OAs when the monster moves.

Neutral Evil seems the right spot but as others say it depends on his motivation to rule.

If it's to depose an evil tyrant for the good of all, he may be considered TN or even NG.

He does it to gain, exert and demonstrate power over others, so I'd say he's evil. What he does is a good example of tyranny, which is LE.
You think the Soviet Union under Stalin was completely horrible in every way? It was tyranny, but the government did still protect them from harm.

Seems good, love to see other peoples takes on this.

I want to bring this kind of character to the table but I know "Ehuh, my character is Evil!" is a huge red flag to most GMs, I'm happy to have him save the day, quest for the good of all and be the hero but don't want the GM to say "You're bloke is a pretty swell guy, you're LN now."

Advantage is a very potent bonus. You ever see the Inspired and Second Chance traits in Pathfinder? Reroll skill checks 1/day, reroll a failed save 1/day. Used correctly, they are the difference between winning and losing. In 5e, anything that grants advantage should be pursued and exploited to the greatest extent possible. Flanking already provides bonuses, particularly when your entire party is wailing on one enemy. If you're so inclined, small modifiers like +2 shouldn't disrupt anything, as far as I'm concerned.

Lawful Evil, definitely.
He's protecting his flock, sure. But he's protecting them because they are HIS.
An evil character can, from the outside, appear to be a very good character until you scratch away at the surface and see what really motivates them.

Take the healer feat. You can revive companions with a bonus action. You're god now.

I want to make a noble who disappeared among voodoo using savages and returned changed, wielding their strange magics. What class should I roll? Part of me wants to do necromancer wizard, but I also think Warlock would be pretty good for it. It's too bad the warlock can't raise any undead.

Been playing with this one DM for two years now. First campaign we did had flanking and back attack. Second campaign had just flanking. Our next campaign will have neither.

I've convinced him that advantage should be something relatively hard to get. Which it should be.

Bear in mind that when the party faces a boss, you mustn't think of them as a single character, but as several. They have action economy on their side, and action economy is crazy strong. It only takes one successful grapple check to lock your boss down, and a party of five characters get five (or more, with things like action surge or haste) attempts per round, while the boss only gets one roll to get out. Likewise, your party can toss five control spells on him each round, while he can only use his action to get out of one of them.

Bosses meant to be used in singular are typically the ones with lair and legendary actions. Other bosses should get a few mooks to help them out.
Exactly this. A common example of a character who would come across as better than he really is is NE, as that is the alignment usually associated with sociopaths. High Charisma and NE combined is what gives you things like vampires that put on a convincing air of nobility or grace, or psycopathic wife-beating swindlers who befriend the law and lie their butts off, coming across as charming and caring even though it's all an act.

I currently play a lawful evil character, and hell, most of the party even acknowledges that he is evil. But they have accepted him because he has always done right by them. In fact, for the first time, at level 9, (started at level one) has my character done something that required the rest of the party to step up and say something.

My character being evil has also given the party some insight into the minds of other npcs and their motives. Had to track down a killer at one point, my character suggested following Person A, because the killer is either Person A or Person B, if he is Person A, we have him, if he is Person B, he will come after person A.

Of course, they didn't like the end of the plan of letting the killer murder the other person so we can be certain or just killing both of them. But that was a problem for the good guys in the party to figure out.

...