/5eg/ - Fifth Edition General

I just don't get what's the problem with having it as an option

Hey all, OP from last thread here, have passed a bunch of your feedback as to how 5e could be improved onto Wizards with the Feats for Skills survey.

It seems like they do actually read the feedback and actually listen, so could be good for us all.

>Denda
>Tiamat

I get that, Fighter, Paladin and Ranger should have every fighting style available out of their options.

I already fixed that.
I'm working on Legendary actions, swallowing, and her damnable breath weapon of doom.
I'll give it a proof reading before sreencapping my WIPs next time.

They should just remove all the classes and make everything an archetype the race you pick

I thought it would be fun and interesting to play a character with low perception.

It is neither.

Playing a firbolg in a new campaign tomorrow, any tips? I'm playing a druid with some healing and beast sense and locat animal/plants. I know it's pretty generic but the GM is new so i wanted to keep it simple.

WotC's surveys are all about quantity over quality. Everything I've read shows that wide-detail feedback is taken more seriously if they see it in multiple results, since they receive results in spreadsheet form.

Basically: if Veeky Forums wants to be heard, Veeky Forums needs to set up and each give feedback instead of screaming on here anonymously.

Hope you edited the feedback so the posters sounded less autistic.

Currently playing a character with low perception as well.

DM uses it to punish me instead of create funny scenarios.
It's pretty lame, to be honest.

He's kind of a pyromancer and in his backstory he accidentally set a place on fire on accident. And didn't notice the place was burning down until it was too late.

Firbolg seem to be hippy.gentle giants this time around.
I'd probably roleplay as someone that tries to see the best in people and is just a kind hearted soul until he needs to protect his friends (or animal friends).

The issue with this is that Ranger isn't even the worst for identity.

Really Druid's are just an animistic Cleric, Barbarians are Fighters, Sorcerers and Warlocks are Wizards with different fluff...

Really the only classes that can't be absorbed by others are... Fighter, Cleric and Wizard. Who'd have thought?

The issue is most of these classes have room for their own unique abilities that doesn't work well within another class. Paladin's Holy Smite would be OP as fuck on a War Cleric, Rogues Sneak Attack doesn't mesh well with Fighters and etc.

Rangers one issue now is they gave it really shitty fucking fluff. Champion of they Fey should've been a Ranger thing instead of Warlock and Paladin.

Alright Veeky Forums I want the most plant-focused build I can have.

What are my options?
Leaning toward ranger with magic initiate druid for entangle.

I run for a party with PPs of 19, 18, 17, 14 and 10. 10 should be considered average but the way the game works means it's low. How would you suggest I make fun scenarios for that? It's a devotion paladin, by the way.

If you check the Forgotten Realms Wiki there's some good fluff on there, most of it's a bit outdated but still fine to use.

Really play up the friendly generous thing, they like to help people but believe it takes away from the act if the person knew they helped. So that could be fun to play around with a bit.

Ranger and take Shillelagh with Magic Initiate. Pure Wisdom melee build.

Also use the Primeval Guardian UA option to turn into a Treeman. Be the wise old tree.

My character has a pp of 9, so just 1 below average and my DM treats it like I am oblivious to the sunshine in my eyes.

I mean, having 10 PP *should* be just a normal person. Seems to me like you just lack situational awareness that others have come to naturally learn as a result of being in a constant threat of danger.
Maybe because you're a devotion paladin you just don't really live your life with the same mindset of others in the group.

They really shouldn't. Fighters should (and do) have access to all of them, Paladins shouldn't have the ranged option, and Rangers shouldn't have the GWF one. It doesn't fit the theme that Wizards is trying to emulate.

Oh I forgot primeval guardian was a thing.
My group might be down for that.

I guess as a feat it wouldn't hurt to take polearm master.

Nature Cleric, Land Druid or Primeval Guardian Ranger Wood Elf

How is 5E in terms of ease of teaching someone how to play who has very little experience playing a TTRPG? I've been looking for a system to run some classic dungeon crawling. The last time I played a fantasy PNP was with Pathfinder a few years ago. Is it as rules intensive as 3.5 or Pathfinder? Relatively easy for a new person with little experience to learn? I do a game night every Monday with my brother and his wife. My brother's experienced in TTRPGs whereas his wife's only experience with them is a session of All Flesh and the current CoC stuff I've been running for them.
Or would I be better off picking up something like Descent?

>You have to have fun the way I want

Give her ability/movement to hover like the astral dragon.

It's much more streamlined than 3.pf. There are simpler systems that do the same thing but not from WotC.

I'm getting some good ideas for the character, and I'l def check out the wiki. Thanks

I would agree with that except for the fact the theme's nowhere. There's nothing in the Rangers fluff pages that calls them out for specifically being only ranged or light weapons.

I think they should all have the basic styles but each have some unique ones as well. The unique ones should be directly related to the abilities of the class instead of "You should use this weapon"

It's one of the easiest games to learn I know.

If you know how to read, throw a die and count to 30 you will do just fine.

Why?
I'll give her plane hopping, but why should the climbing terror snek float?

I want a Shield, I want a Shortsword and I want spells.

What's the funnest character I can make here?

5e is a lot more streamlined than the 3rd/PF autism editions.
It's easy as for new people to learn, and the character creation is a breeze, with most things working right out of the box. Allow the UA ranger in place of the PHB ranger, and maybe allow UAs for them to use as well.

5e does place more of an onus on you and for the players to be less distracted in other editions, the rules are streamlined but it also gives you the advice of "have fun, bro" as well.

If you have at least one player with GWM / Sharpshooter in the party, the DM should always increase HP on any monster / NPC that is supposed be a threat. There is no dispute about this, yeah?

How much should this increase be, though? Just max HP according to hit die? I've taken to giving creatures with d8 hit die a flat 7+Con per HD instead of 4.5+Con. With boss monsters I just multiply HP by 1.5. since that appears to give them slightly more than max.

If you are going to be this petty, don't let them pick the feat, or nerf it before hand.

Well... It depends. If it's just one character who is pretty powerful I wouldn't do anything, he invested a resource into having high weapon damage and that's his thing. I wouldn't make all enemies succeed on saves if the Wizard picked a powerful spell.

If the whole party is about the same power-level I'd give some more difficult encounters.

If one muchkin fuck has blown everyone else out the water I'd just ask him to stop for the sake of everyone's fun.

if you don't want to multiclass;
Valor Bard
Paladin
Eldritch Knight
Cleric
Ranger
Druid (Scimtar, not shortsword)

Eldritch Knight probably.

Or Paladin.

Wow good job not having an actual argument.

Much like there isn't a fluff justification for no ranged Paladins, it's just noticeably shitty to play both STR Ranger and ranged Pally.

My group has both a GWM and Sharpshooter

It's pretty ridiculous, nobody else can do damage anywhere near theirs, and they don't use any sort of resource to do their damage.

So I just give a lot of stuff higher HP / AC, and they fight a lot of monsters with resistances due to the nature of the campaign/ me being a dick

>gm:there's a giant orb in the room
>me: do I know anything about it or it's nature?
>roll arcana (rolled 16, meh) you know it's obviously magical
>okay lads, let's stay back, I'll poke at this thing with mage hand to see if it's unstable or something
>as your mage hand touches it, you feel a rush of information coming to your head. You suffer a -2 permanent penalty to wisdom
>what? what about my gnome cunning, do I get advantage or something?
>there's no save
>welp

>later complains why I rarely ever help to check for traps and stuff

>It doesn't fit the theme that Wizards is trying to emulate.
First, you don't say why. Second, just because it's the theme WotC, it doensn't mean no one should be able to play Rangers with greatswords.

>it's just noticeably shitty to play both STR Ranger and ranged Pally.
Pallies can't smite with ranged attacks, but the only thing STR rangers lose is 2 AC, as the class has access to medium armor

>fun

"Fun" literally does not matter, as fun is (1) subjective, and (2) should not be considered a goal of RPGs. If fun is your goal, then you should not be playing an RPG, because there are so many things that require far less effort for far more fun. Drinking, ass-fucking, coke-snorting. Hell, fucking is free. And I'm pretty sure most people would agree that D&D is not better than sex. So...why play RPGs? There is more reason to play them than the stupid-ass instant gratification that OP wants. That's why D&D 5e has you level up to level 2 after the first session: normies and roasties want instant gratification. They want to level up after zero effort, just like in Diablo or Dark Scrolls or Skyrim or one of those other crap-ass games they play. That's why RPGs have been casualized to hell and back, to make them more "fun." But you know what? They aren't fun, for a huge percentage of the fanbase. And don't pretend it's a democracy. The kind of game they make is based on whatever latest demographic the jews who run the company want to pander to. "Muh traditions" is not the issue here: the issue is pussifying the games. Are you such a spineless faggot you can't even stand a challenge in a game that has no actual bearing on your real life? The DM is well within his rights to do this. If characters keep dying, maybe it's because their players are being retarded, and they should learn to stop being retarded. Generally speaking, the only way a person can die over and over in an RPG is if they are not only doing stupid things, but ignoring the advice of their comrades and doing Darwin-Award-tier shit to get killed off. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. That's how life works, and running an RPG like that makes it more engaging.

That's fucked. -2 for a day or so would be fine, but fuck that.

You sound like the worst person to play with.

God forbid people disagree with someone who is such a "purist".

I'd be fine if he made me take a nice chunk of psychic damage and roll for a possible short/long term madness, but just "-2 WIS enjoy it faggot" felt very poor

>you touched something
>but you didn't even touch something, you used a fucking summon
>permanent stat penalty
what

Whats the dumbest dwarf clan name you can come up with?

BigBeard

Could you clean up your wording, it's a bit awkward as is.

It's pasta, user

4/10 pasta

It's not about being petty, it's about keeping up the challenge without denying the "fun" feats to martials. They just love dealing shittons of damage. I just gotta make sure the damage increase doesn't trivialize the important encounters.

In my case I have two, one with GWM, the other with Sharpshooter. Besides, contrary to what I thought, increasing monster HP doesn't invalidate their choice, it actually makes them shine more in combat but that's to be expected. The rest of the party is definitely powerful as well, they are really well-rounded and have great defenses thanks to a bit of multiclassing and a 20 Cha paladin. I had to step up my game or they'd be steamrolling through everything.

You get what I'm saying, then. I don't usually increase AC, except when I have decent reasons for doing so. I do increase attack bonuses and saving throw DCs by 1 in all my monsters and NPCs, though.

Do your wranglers know you've escaped from the pen?

Would you believe me if I told you I used almost the same wording of the 3.e version, changing the numbers and deleting the word "awesome"?

Nice pasta, here's your (You)

MacLargeMacHuge.

>Plan to max out dex and cha AND get a feat

Don't.

Clay Flintgranite

Yes.

My female orcs look like pic related.

>why
There's the popular image of Rangers being either arrow dudes or dual-wielding dudes, but there isn't really a prominent great weapon-wielding ranger dude. You'll also notice that they don't have access to heavy armor, which is the one trait they give to all classes that they intend to have STR as a viable option (Barbarians being a notable exception).

Same argument applies for Paladins, in that they either sword&board or they get up in your face with a heavy weapon. TWF would be one of the better fighting styles for a Vengeance Paladin, but it isn't therefor them to pick, most likely because it doesn't fit the narrow image Wizards has.

Also, it's their game, so they absolutely do get to decide what they consider the baseline of each class "trope".

Too late.

And like pic related.

Aragorn is the Ranger

>tfw waiting for a player and DM to get back from their normie social lives so the DM can open up the tabletop simulator server and begin the session

This is suffering

Have you thought about getting a less cunty gm?

Tall goblins?
Humans coloured green?

...

Lucky for me, dm rolled for all of our stats. Got 16,14,13,13,10,7. I can either play half elf and start with 16 cha and dex, plus 14 in two other stats, or go variant human, get the feat I need, start with 17 cha and 15 dex, and at lvl 4 bump that up to 18 and 16, then use remaining 3 ASIs this build will give me to get to 20 in each. Even with point buy this would be possible by going vhuman, starting with the feat and 16 in cha and dex, then using the 4 ASIs to bump each up to 20. Quite possible.

Holy shit
Link that DM to this very fucking thread, I think we all would like a word with him/her, see if they can somehow defend their case / claim you're misinforming us.

>this clearly overpowered option necessitates me to change every encounter
>it further penalizes everyone who hasn't taken this option and is already feeling useless
Y'all need to grow a brain, a dick, and a heart.
Disallow GWM/Sharpshooter or rein them in.

And my female Shifters look like this!

At what point does he have a maul, greataxe, or greatsword?

Narsil is a longsword, complete with the Versatile feature.

>i dont like the fighter being good at the one thing he can do, deal damage!

but hes totally cool with wizards warping reality and ending encounters with a single spell

>I play games
>not for fun

Stronger party = Harder encounter

The original entries aren't really the problem, it's your addendums that are awkwardly phrased.

You don't have a stronger party, you have a stronger character.
>these four guys have 20 HP
>and the barbarian has 500 HP
>i should increase the damage of all my monsters to 6d10 in order to pose a threat to him

Thing is, it wasn't him touching it. It's a dm dick move. If I had to do this as a gm I'd flavor it as...

Upon touching the orb your mage hand shatters and a bolt of power leaps towards you in the blink of an eye, a flood of information cascades through you mind, int/wis save (not sure which) or take a small amount of psychic damage and take a -2 penalty to wis as the information makes it hard to concentrate and gives you a headache. If you want to punish them make them reroll the save at the beginning of each long rest otherwise end it at the end of the day.

Is reach on a weapon really as gamebreaking as previous threads have made it out to be? Like, something such as a really long whip that can go out to 10 ft

Why does monster HP and Damage suddenly go off the charts at CR20+, rather than continuing in the same pattern as before 20?

>When I first started playing, Hammerbeard. I was asked to justify it by the gm so I said that the ancestor of the clan used to tie a weight in his beard and swing it around as he fought.

Alright senpai.
I've got a party of 4 level 11 characters about to likely head into the shadowfell.

What are some creatures and encounters they should have to face?

Huh, it's almost like the DM has to adjust encounters to the party they run for! What a novel idea.

Dunno about the other DM, but I do have a stronger party. Besides, like I said before, I don't make encounters more deadly for the other party members. I just make monsters harder to kill, which is the exact opposite of what you said in your greentext.

My first thought for a two-handed Ranger would be Garruk from mtg. He's very clearly a Ranger with a Greataxe.

Honestly I do think of axes when I think of Rangers and from there I think of both Handaxes and Greataxes but maybe that's just me.

Brobeard, had someone actually use that as a name

HP ramps from +15/lv to +45/lv
Damage ramps from +6/lv to +18/lv.

They both suddenly triple in rate of increase.

So my party just suffered our first casualty. We have had close calls before but this time our luck ran out. We weren't careless or greedy, but it still happened. Our group is all irl friends and the one that got killed had just started shining as an important party member. It was actually quite emotional as dumb as that sounds.

Anyone else had any moments in your games that had an impact on you irl?

>these four guys do 5 damage
>this guy does 125 damage
>i should increase the HP of all my monsters to 400 so they don't keel over immediately
If you keep pretending to be retarded we're just going to declare you a retard and leave it at that.

So out of pure curiosity what is everyone's thoughts on the strongest possible 4-man party?
We'll say all official content + ua revised ranger and a second list with all us content.

Does anyone ever actually bother to calculate how long their Wizard needs to prepare spells? At 15+ it can take close to the time for a short rest for them to prepare.