/5eg/ D&D 5e General

Will I be hated if I make a tiefling monk?

So had an idea wanted to do a Shadow Monk to level 6 then multiclass into Rouge Assassin 6 levels. My next thought was 2 into fighter for Action Surge and the rest Monk, or should I just skip the Fighter?

Note, no I can't play Mystic, DM doesn't want UA classes unless it's a rebalance like the Ranger.

Magic is just science in a world where the universe is different. Arcane casters are scientists, everything they do makes sense if you know the underlying theory and anyone can do it with practice.

Druidic and Divine magic is weird, but Arcane is just study and application of natural laws.

Depends.

Good looks. This is honestly good to build around. Also, magic should go like this: seem awe-inspiring, then seem understandable, then the true fuckedness of it all becomes revealed and our tiny minds snap under the pressure.

>How weird should magic be?

Well its already pretty weird, responsible for all sorts of oddballs like owlbears but one must remember this is D&D, its not fucking Warhammer. The magic is more Lovecraftian in nature, ie utilitarian and not particularly crazifying or corrupting in its own right, though there are exceptions.

I've done it with a Flying Abyssal Feral Tiefling. I was the walking joke of the party thanks to a series of bad rolls on a random Tiefling chart.

To be completely honest, when a majority of the people who want to play mystics are weeaboos who wana be an anime character, the people with the hate boner for the class aren't really the ones being autistic. The look like bastions of impartiality and reason.

Just because it's understood doesn't mean it isn't scary to a normal person because of the things you can do with it.

Advantage on Strength checks is already something that Barbarians get through rage.

The mystic doesn't really seem like its own class at all, just a reflavor of existing classes with added power. So I don't like it very much.

>complaining about weeaboos on a Malaysian silent film image board

Does anyone have the Dawnforgedcast Ultimate bladelock word file?

True. I frequently use Thaumaturgy to announce "FEAR ME" to low-level enemies. The DM lets me roll Intimidate with advantage, since peasants and goblins are easy frightened by displays of magic

after extra attack is better

I will never understand why people want to be super gish anime character with swords. I just want to play an Ardent who's a dirty criminal that's half insane.

What would giving monks the ability to use the LVL 2 Ki features for free at let say lvl 12 and higher do for them?

Is it enough to fix the class?

I just want to be professor X for my team of adventurers, is that so wrong?

And this should continue with the rest of the martials.

lifting/carrying doesn't often come up, but sure i'm fine with them getting that at some point
true strike is an okay idea, and i like the idea of martials having more in combat options, but honestly thats not the problem with martials, and true strike itself doesn't actually really even help with martials having more to do in combat.
advantage on all str and dex skills and checks is just a bad idea imo. but maybe if they could get more character abilities that are out of combat discrete skill/check tricks, that would be cool.

Set his shit on fire and it becomes dogshit. You should feel bad about wanting to see his excrement.

Anime are main stream media now. Only autistic people hate them.

Mystic 2.0 is a rebalance of itself

Agreed. I'm not against the idea of the mystic, but when the mystic literally has an achetype for every niche in the game but can do that niche BETTER and with MORE VERSATILITY than the classes MEANT to excel at those niches, sorry, I'm banning the class from my table and no amount of calling me an autist or saying I having a kneejerk reaction is going to stop me.

I like the idea of mystics. I really do. But Mystics should be the caster version of Monks.
I wish we had gotten actual mystics instead of all the existing classes BUT WITH PSYCHIC POWERS!

there are no assumptions of population distribution of anything resembling a PC class in 5e dude, and thank God

So a setting may be uber high magic like in 1e AD&D where every city guard patrol by default has its own magic user, or they may be so rare that the PCs may only encounter only a few wizards in the entire campaign.

There's nothing wrong with, say, having the only clerics in the campaign to speak of be an affair like Jesus and the apostles, just a handful of people empowered by a single deity that is otherwise mute and distant, etc., or even a deity only appointing one cleric at all at a time.

If you really read the disciplines, most of the versatility options have next to no combat benefits, and typically have weaker effects overall, so if they were more limited they would have a higher cost.

Nomadic Mind has a broken ass Focus, but the rest of the effects are sort of ass.

Very bad idea, barbarians already give up a lot and rage has a lot of limitations.

I hate this "casters are OP because they can cast plane shift, muh myth and legend... THEREFORE, lets wank off the fighter and make him clearly superior to the barbarian!"

Cool bro! Wanting to testplay something is obviously a crime against humanity

The same could be said with Wizard

But its not better.

You have to be crazy to think that a Mystic is better than a Wizard or a Cleric.

On the burst damage front, the mystic nova is less reliable than the Paladin one (also, only one chance to hit per turn)

The only thing that he is better, is if you compare against a monk of 4 elements but then... this should be expected.

Now you can have different builds it the class,that much is true. i dont know how is this a bad thing.

Seems to me they should just roll monk into mystic

It is if it's from that turd.

Barbarian is just kinda crappy. It needs more options too

Depends on what you mean "default" by I guess.
In at least two of the "generic" campaign settings (Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms) your information is dead wrong, but if you mean the "non-setting" D&D like you see in video games where all the generic D&D rules apply but nothing is particularly fleshed out in favor of just letting the rules be whatever fluff text the setting has, then yeah, that's true.

>when the mystic literally has an achetype for every niche in the game but can do that niche BETTER and with MORE VERSATILITY than the classes MEANT to excel at those niches,

Speaking hypothetically I take it? They don't.

Everyone who claims this BS chickens out and can't offer the slightest iota of proof. All they have is "Wot4E monk!"

If you really read the disciplines, you have shit like a 120 ft Charm Person spell with no components and no penalty for failing (the target doesn't know you attempted anything), a Darkness spell that literally has no duration and lasts forever, effects with status effects that still happen even on a successful save, and a psychic claw attack that isn't actually stipulated to take your Action and can pretty much be done at any time.

If you "actually read" the disciplines, or the UA in general, it's a fucking mess full of so many exploits and errors that it reads like some 15 year old's homebrew straight off of DandDwiki.

Too many features rely on Rage, so if you follow the standard rest format, the Barbarian is a strictly worse fighter for half a days encounters. They should have things they can do, raging or not, and then rage is their "super mode" thats limited.

yep better fuck them over hardcore to make the fighter look better

makes perfect sense

Yeah, the sheer versatility should have been toned down heavily for 5e.
Pillars of Eternity got Psionics right with their Cypher class.

I dunno man, Rogue gets expertise, so he doesn't really need it. Barbarians advantage comes from a limited/day thing so you can't just give the other classes advantage all the time, it's already pretty fucked if your barbarian is giving up a rage just to pass a strength check.

I feel like Martials should get maneuvers of a sort in every class as part of their progression. I feel like Rogue is in a pretty good spot because they can dash or disengage or hide on their turn without wasting a round and that can lead to some fun stuff.

I wish the Battlemaster maneuvers were just part of every martial class and Battlemaster was the BEST at them, rather than the only one who gets them. Like there could be a list of maneuvers for each class that are flavorful and different.

Hell, they could just split up Battlemasters maneuvers and give each of the other martials some of them and Battlemasters thing is that he can take them all. Barbarian with Menacing, pushing and sweeping attacks could be really flavorful and spice up the combat a bit.

Battlemaster is the only interesting martial class it seems like.

Then redesign the barbarian to have it give up less and have less limitations in its rage class feature.
In the redesign, the barbarian is going to get advantage on Str and Dex skill checks out of rage.
It's you who wants to just wank off the fighter, don't be autistic.

Which has nothing to do with my point, the "op" and hyper versatile options tend to be mechanically weaker, while the "strong" options are either more niche, or pure combat.

It's a set up that would work fine, in design terms, if they limited discipline selection a bit more.

What is more fun to play?
Conjurer, Evoker or Abjurer?

How about the option to skip your Extra Attack in a turn to apply one of the attack style maneuvers, perhaps doled out by class.

>Literally gives multiple examples why the class is OP and broken
>SCREEEEEE THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MY POINT ABOUT HOW THE CLASS ISN'T OP AND BROKEN! I WANA PLAY AN ANIME CHARACTER!

I think we're done here. Was a good discussion, but lets not do it again any time soon.

Well in the playtest all martials did get maneuvers and superiority dice the fighter was just the best at it.

No, The claw attack costs a action, its pretty clear to me.

You should be complaining about the wording on the dragon breath, i dont have a clue about what that shit costs (But then, any fucking DM would not be a retarded and let you use for free.)

>shitposts about anime while shitposting WITH anime
You listed editing mistakes, rather than discussing design.

>Battlemaster is the only interesting martial class it seems like.
To each his own, but I get what you mean.
The idea that guys like the Champion gets fewer Maneuvers and instead focuses on buffing his basic capabilities (more attacks, more Fighting Styles, high Criticals) but getting SOME Maneuvers while a Battlemaster gets more maneuvers but focus less on pure athletic and physical prowess is appealing to me, with Eldritch Knight sacrificing both options for limited magic.

That would be cool, but some of them use your reaction or bonus action. Just learning some at certain levels would be enough.

Not that user, but if we're talking about design-choices, the poor way this UA was executed gives me little faith that the design parts were actually thought out all that well either to be honest. Like, WotC is a professional company for fucks sake, show some professionalism with the material you put out. At least pretend you playtested it a little first, or hire someone who actually knows the rules of your own game to proofread it before you put it out there.

I didn't know that. Neat.

They should get the maneuver in addition to their attack, and have the maneuver resolve as a bonus action.

They should have a more comprehensive list of maneuvers though and have them work as the ones in the ToB.

I was trying to say that ones which requires specific actions should remain in the realm of the Battlemaster, he's better at tactics because thats what he does.

Instead, you let the on-hit ones be traded in for, and throw in Sweeping Attack in the same manner for barbarians. Classes can even get a few unique ones, something like a rogue giving up sneak attack for a turn he could get it to apply disadvantage on all the enemies attacks and advantage on the rogues next attack, dirty fighting, base the DC on dex.

>a 120 ft Charm Person

Its not Charm Person, though. Its a save negates, HUMANOID ONLY, charm effect, and the "charmed" condition does fuck all: advantage on cha saves and can't attack you. For 1 round.

Guidance gives nearly as big of a bonus and works with ALL FUCKING SKILLS, not just cha checks vs humanoids.

>Le "WIZARDS ARE OVERPOWERED ZOMG MEME"

When will this die? The only people who keep spouting this retardation either haven't played Wizards in 5e, or assume that Level 20 is the default play-state for every campaign ever.

>hand barbarian's cool skill schtick to fighters because "martial pride!'

ok

>bad or no editors for a free, playtesting release
>somehow reflects on poorly on design
>somehow reflects poorly on the ENTIRETY OF WOTC, even though M:TG has some of the strictest editing around

It's essentially free advantage on every social interaction ever, and 100% spammable because there's no failure penalty and it doesn't actually require you to stop talking or anything because there's no component cost. Who even needs Charisma?

Nice of you to selectively leave that part out though.

>I wish the Battlemaster maneuvers were just part of every martial class
ive been trying to write a thing for martials that would be something like:
>you have a d8 martial die
>you can expend it to use various maneuvers that you accrue as you level
>you can use your action to regain it
that plus been toying with stances and stuff too. the maneuvers would be like some of the not magicaly tome of battle maneuvers
but the problem for me overall is that the real problem is martials kick ass in combat, but aren't as strong out of combat. its really the other two pillars that they need help at. BUT even then they're actually okay if the player bothers to do anything besides make a muscle wall that can only hit things good and nothing else, so i think really what needs to happen is casting needs an overhaul.

BUT really what i've acutally been doing is
1) keeping my party low level, and not letting them level up, and instead giving them options to just take new abilities every so often, or whatever else. so their hp is low, which keeps combat kind of quick. also the campaign has stayed kind of low magic that way. well, not the campaign, but the party.
2) making weapons that are kind of interesting, or at least a little more interesting/choiceful. i made a sword that you pick between two different grips when you attack, one is pressing, which gives -1 to hit but +2 to damage, one is controlled, which is +1 to hit, -2 to damage.

so far its been going ok but i'm kind of a shit dm. i wish i could just like, come up with settings and mechanics and have a DM who does the actually dming while i just kind of lurk and do lore and stuff.

next campaign i do i might tweak how magic works a lot, and what abilities classes get. like move things around so their out of combat abilities are more front loaded, plus give them martial die. i think dnd magic just doesn't work how the rest of it is written.

Do you have a good explanation for it? If so I see no problem with it. I made a Tiefling paladin, and my group loves that guy.

I would just let Battlemaster be the only one who gets the superiority die and everyone else can get some of the skills but not all of them. I think a Swashbuckling Rogue being able to learn Parry, Riposte would be cool and those are both reactions, a Valor Bard learning maneuvering attack or that one that lets an ally attack in your place would be cool, I would make the other classes have a smaller list of maneuvers they can learn but have them function the same.

>It's essentially free advantage on every social interaction ever,

No. With humanoids. You get nearly the same benefit with Guidance *on everything*.

>Nice of you to selectively leave that part out though

Hm? The best case interpretation still leaves it inferior to Guidance.

I could talk about how guidance is only an extra 1d4 instead of actual advantage, and all the other flaws in your retarded reasoning, but it's easier just to post a meme-pic and a line of greentext than argue with an actual idiot.

>Psionic fanboys literally making objectively wrong arguments like this to defend their anime characters.

>On a successful save, the creature is unaffected and has no inkling of your attempt to bend its will.

That is a line specifically mentioned in some parts of the UA, and is not contained within Mystic Charm.

Even if you assume they can't know, even if they fail, advantage on charisma checks on humanoids, and making them not attack you, isn't all that different from Friends. Friends has a down side, but it also isn't limited by Humanoids./

What the fuck are you blathering about, you fucking autistic retard?

>instead of actual advantage

For an average non diplo/charisma based dude, advantage is like +5. For a high social focused dude or someone below the curve, advantage is more like +3.

1d4 averages out to 2.5.

+1d4 is pretty close to +3 then, isn't it?

Guidance is infinitely more versatile, and can be cast on others. Hell, if anything the bigger problem is casting Friends/Mystic Charm WHILE under Guidance from an ally.

But then again, you could already do that. Ya know. With Friends.

I want to play a soul-knife that's probably more than a little off their rocker that claims their abilities are granted to them by the spirits that guide them, with their weapon instead of being laser-fists being a shovel while still remaining mechanically the same.

No, you always round down in 5e.

Remarkable Athlete rounds up.

>Incessant bitching about there being no mystic.
>Get the mystic
>Bitch about it

Fuck off. You got what you wanted. If it's not exactly what you wanted then just talk to your DM and work things out like any other class. There's no pleasing you people is there?

I agree, except for the "do it better" part.
The sheer amount of favoritism poured into this UA is a bit of a turnoff. I won't outright ban it from the table until I see it in play a bit, but the sheer circlejerk the mystic apparently turned into behind closed doors has left a bad first impression on me.

There was also a large group of people that detested the very idea of a psionic class.

Personally, I think it seems fun.

The only people who wanted mystic were weeaboos, 3.5aboos, and a combination of the previous two but in denial about it.

The sad part is, it was actually done better in 3.5.

Not that guy but
Friends doesn't make humanoids unable to attack you however, and encourages it after a minute.
This can essentially take someone out of the fight for a minute, and can be exploited to burn legendary resistances. I'm not sure if OP, but it is fairly powerful.

Why do people detest psionics? And why do they feel there's no place for it in D&D? Never understood that at all.

>Incessant bitching about there being no mystic.
>People who don't like the class or the idea of psionics make fun of the first group.
>Mystic comes out as Mearls pet-class frontloaded to the brim
>The second group of people bitch about it
>The first group of people tries to silence them like (you)

I was one of the people who fucking hated the idea of it, but I'm actually happy that I can take the Avatar Order and take mostly Crowns and Mantles to remake my Ardent.

People keep saying weeaboos wanted the mystic, but the only tie is
>muh avatar bending
which isn't even a god damned japanese program.

>1 minute is until your next turn
>unable to attack the mystic is taken out of the fight
>ever using legendary resistances on something that doesn't fucking matter

Subtle.

I mean, is it too much to ask for it to be done well? Also, we arn't all in consensus here, this is an anonymous korean mountain-biking board after all.

its not really so much psionics as the people who like psionics and the design philosophies surrounding it.

I don't so much feel that there's no place for it, it just feels... unnecessary. Its basically just another caster, and while I wouldn't mind a setting with just arcane/divine or just psionic, having both just feels like bloat.
That's how I see it, anyway.

It has no place in most people settings and if it's an official option players bitch when you ban it.

Though it exists in a lot of settings as a key part, it needs rules eventually.

I hate them a bit because I remember how broken they've been in the past. I'm not even talking 3rd, I'm talking back when you had to roll on a table to even get a chance to play them. If someone made the roll game over man, rest of the party were just his sidekicks. No fun at all man.

Illithids are as much a part of D&D as beholders and dragons at this point.

not at all, I was contemplating how cool but disappointing the ardent is, due to how the mantles are grossly scattershot and unbalanced to a ridiculous degree

time ardents are among the simplest and yet most OP thing around while if you want, say, an elementalist ardent doesn't get any kind of elemental attacks at all til like level 11