/5eg/ DnD 5th Edition General

A Binder makes short pacts with "vestiges" in order to gain small amounts of their power, in return for doing favors for them or taking on parts of their aspect. The difference is that while Warlocks have one pact for life, Binders have the option to re-negotiate their pact every long rest, or get a new pact with a different vestige by foregoing their old pact. They played as a jack of all trades, master of none class that could be different skill sets every night, but never anything that's really overpowered.

>Binders have multiple pacts that can wear off for another pact.

Imagine a warlock making pacts with numerous patrons and then all of those pacts being consolidated into one ultra-pact from some mediating patron. A cosmic debt collector, basically. Sounds kind of neat.

>tfw you get baited into making the retard argument
Do you have any self control?

I'm emailing wizards now with this monumental find! Don't worry user i'll make sure to credit you when i win a Pulitzer.

I see. That could probably be rolled into a warlock subclass, with your patron being the collective of minor spirits and beings that your warlock is getting power and knowledge from.

I get the feeling that the more power a Warlock required the more you needed to narrow down your sources, but that's totally subjective since even the exact metaphysical mechanical differences between a Cleric and a Warlock are vague at best, especially since you can be both Clerics OR Warlocks of stuff like Demon Lords and Infernal Dukes.

One cannot possess the self; the self is all there is.

even better, now making a ranger that can wall off entire areas that no creature can enter.

Go away zet.

actually, you can easily say that your warlock gains more power as more "friends" enter into the collective. You could fluff it that each spell and invocation is another "friend" that you are calling upon.

All it does is prevent you from entering the ground that it's cast on, which was already the case unless you were a creature with a Burrowing speed.

You might be able to use it to form a bridge over lava though, depending on whether your DM considers that ground due to its high density or a true fluid that you'd sink into.

I'll take you seriously the moment you start talking in the first person.

>you cannot enter its area
>implying area means an object's mass/the matter of the object

Yes you can. Its "area" would be the flat, two-dimensional space that it occupies.

Suppose you spill water; the water occupies an "area" on the floor where the water is. You can enter the area by stepping on the water.

You're thinking in terms of volume or mass. If a sponge was thrown into the area of the spilled water, then the water's volume/mass would enter the sponge.

If I was your DM, at this point I would smite you for being a piece of shit that's taking thirty minutes to resolve a simple action because you've got some fetish for being difficult

>Otherworldly Patron: the Multi-Level Marketer

You mean, like it was in 4e?

>All it does is prevent you from entering the ground that it's cast on
which is fantastic your an archer ranger. Cast it in front of you, no one can possibly get near you. Fire away.

This is true, a kind of Binder Pact (or Vestige Pact)

Instead of one single patron, you establish pacts with many, less powerful beings.

I'd play it.

You don't understand. They can walk atop it, just as anything can already walk ATOP the ground. Its effects only apply if you enter the area, but since it is a solid object it cannot be entered any more than you can "enter" a road.

If you're standing on the grass and step onto a concrete sidewalk and continue to move, are you "entering the concrete" or "moving within concrete"? Obviously not.

from one shitposter to another, this is embarrassing.

>but since it is a solid object
i dont recall anywhere in the spell description it saying it was a solid object.

You're argument is like saying you can't enter a forest, house, pool, or area of fog.

Would you still be in the grass's area if you stepped onto the concrete?

>tfw godlike Wizards with 20 Intelligence and the ability to alter the very nature of reality can't define their spells well enough to make them do anything

The thorns are hard. Solid.
A house has an interior, a forest is a collection of trees, and so on. Of course you can enter them. You can't enter the constituent matter they're made of, though.

You were never in the grass's area to begin with, you were on top of it.

Spike Growth isn't a Wizard spell and I don't think anyone has ever suggested anyone at WotC has more than 14 Int and that guy's the accountant.

>a forest is a collection of trees
and spiked growth is a collection of spikes and thorns. You DO know that it's not just one giant spike, right?

But you can stand on top of all the thorns and vines. You can't stand on a tree unless you're some kind of wuxia master who weighs nothing. And if you are standing on individual leaves of a tree, you're not in the tree, nor are you in the forest beneath you; you are above the forest canopy, out of the forest.

So, what Patrons do folks think are left for Warlocks in this edition?

In 4e, we had Fiend, Fae, Stars, Dark, Vestige, and Sorcerer King.

In 5e, so far, we've had Fiend, Fae, Great Old One, Undying, Celestial, Hexblade, and Raven Queen.

>But you can stand on top of all the thorns and vines
you can also stand among them, like you would with a forest and it's trees.

You are standing among trees, within a forest. There is no "group of thorns" like a forest is a "group of trees". So you can stand among thorns, but not within them. The spell only damages creatures "inside the area of" or "moving within"; can you move INSIDE a tree? Not a hole in a tree, a solid fucking tree.

>can you move INSIDE a tree? Not a hole in a tree, a solid fucking tree.
I can, but i'm not a cuck like you.

So wizards confirmed cavalier as one of the subclasses in the next book. Am I the only person who hopes thwy improve it by the release.

>the only way to take damage from Spike Growth is to cast 3E's Transport Via Plants

Celestial replaces Undying.

What are the benefits of playing a dwarf martial instead of a half-orc one?

Undying Light (positive energy) and Undying (liches and super zombies) aren't the same thing. They were just lazy with names.

What's there to improve, user? They get a whole TWO archetypes, and Wizard only gets Lore Wizard. I think we can stop here and call it balanced.

I like how this nigga has basically reduced the spell he previously pushed as an amazing loads of damage gimmick to uselessness just to try to be right even after people have worked around this issue.

your beard will be that much greater.

Do you *want* to play a dwarf?

How would you create a tiefling "cleric" while ignoring the actual cleric class? I was thinking maybe Bard with Sorcerer levels, but now I'm thinking just going full Celestial Warlock. Which would be more fun?

not being shot on sight in large parts of certain settings

summer fags, amirite?

>Which would be more fun?
We aren't you, user. We can't tell you what you would find fun.

Favored soul

Celestial warlock or favoured soul sorcerer.

Favored Soul Sorcerer or Celestial Warlock are the immediate options that spring to mind. If you want to keep the books a secret or go with the "I'm a religious scholar!" angle, you could go with the Theurge Wizard.

That's probably why they made Celestial into its own patron and had it eat the Undying Light.

she is far too thick

>try and be right
I've succeeded. Spike Growth is dead.
GIVE ME ANOTHER TARGET.

Just play a Paladin they're basically the same thing except they use Charisma instead of Wisdom for some reason.

your skull.

Why is Maze Arcana so...not good?
They have so much potential yet they were still the lowest points of the Stream.

What do you think are the subclasses that will make it to Xanathar's guide to everything?
I really want the primeval guardian to be official.

What would you do if there were thread IDs? Use a proxy, or kill yourself until next thread?

Explain further?

+ Sweet beard
+ People in town like you
+ Can't hit your head in doorways
+ Laugh when someone poisons the party's food and drink, or better yet, play along and beat the shit out of them when they come to collect you
+ FINE DWARVEN CRAFTSMANSHIP
+ Spot all the hidden doors and solve the mysteries of the dungeon because 90% of dank ruins are ancient dwarven buildings
+ It's easy not being green
+ Superior dental hygiene
+ 2/2 racial stats
= Still probably a rape-baby
+ No one knows you're a rape-baby
- Can't reach the top shelf
- Features aren't as good in combat
- Slower
- Not the result of a eugenics program
= Also from space

If you goddamn chucklefucks are this autistic and retarded, you have no reason to complain about Reddit.

What were the high points of the Stream?

>hurr hurr I interpret game mechanics according to a narrow particular literal interpretation that benefits me.
>A creature's space is the area in feet that it effectively controls in combat, not an expression of its physical dimensions.
>A spell's effect expands in straight lines from the point of origin. If no unblocked straight line extends from the point of origin to a location within the area of effect, that location isn't included in the spell's area. To block one of these imaginary lines, an obstruction must provide total cover.

As far as the game is concerned, "area" is the various 5' squares the creature or effect exists in, which can be shared unless otherwise stated (e.g. you cannot end your movement in the same square as an enemy of the same size category as you). If a creature enters a square that is also part of Spike Growth's area, it takes the damage.

Since you're being technical and pedantic, you don't even have to touch the spikes to take the damage. You just have to enter the area or move within it. And Spike Growth never provides cover, so it can't block itself.

Joe in a t-shirt.

Wrong.

>He's out of ideas so he resorts to "n..n...nuh uh!"

Here's my guess

>Barb:
Ancestral Guardian, Storm Herald
>Bard:
Swords and Whispers
>Cleric:
Forge, Grave
>Druid:
Shepherd, Twilight
>Fighter:
Cavalier, Arcane Archer
>Monk:
Kensei, Drunken Master
>Paladin:
Conquest, Redemption
>Ranger:
Deep Stalker, Horizon Walker
>Rogue:
Inquisite and Scout are the only options
>Sorc:
Favored Soul, Phoenix
>Warlock:
Hexblade, Celestial
>Wizard
Loremaster

tell me why im wrong or a faggot

I think we need an argument detector over here

Warlocks should be EB spammers, nothing more.

Mearls' game
Dragon Friends
Dylan Sprouse's game

>If you goddamn chucklefucks are this autistic and retarded
I assure you sir, I am not autistic.

At what size would you allow a monster to wield a two handed weapon in 1 hand

Like if I had a large undead guard watching over a house, and gave it a glaive and a shield. How big should he be

>Lorewizard

That'd be a bold move, especially since most tables would just outright ban it so they wasted money printing the page.

I'll respond when he posts something that actually refutes anything in or relates to the disussion we were having. That argument was nothing but non-sequiturs. Go be ass-blasted somewhere else.

Take the racial feats UA and play a tanking monk.

That's about it.

Are there any chances that the Revised Ranger will be included in Xanathar's?

Large. The creature size.

If this rendition of Cavalier makes it in over Knight I'll throw a fit

Probably especially since they already told everyone to use that instead of the PHB anyway.

link pls

twitter.com/mikemearls/status/871592041204994050

Probably not but... maybe.

>Sorc:
>Favored Soul, Phoenix
if stone sorc doesn't make it, imma choke a bitch.

That's one of the things I loved about 3.5. There were sometimes doubts but they were rare, otherwise you usually had an iron-clad set of rules to follow.

>trying to use "not an argument" after responding to an argument with rule citations, and clear definitions
You brought an argument this time, but you don't seem to refute anything posted, most likely because it uses the rules in the book as opposed to ignoring the rules for areas of spells, and spaces of creatures. And when you're in a discussion about rules you'll find that you only dig yourself deeper the more you stray from the actual text.

but a large creature in 5e can already wield a two-handed weapon (for a medium creature) in one hand

Fuuuuck man. I really hope it makes the cut.

So spike memes aside what is the best way to get the most mileage out of the Ranger class with no multi-classing? The only thing it seems to bring to the table is being able to hide in broad daylight but that's just begging for a Rogue multi-class.

Any size that fits what I'm going for with it.

UA? Beastmaster with a wolf for pack tactics.
PHB? Small race with a medium flying pet that you ride on, giving you flight from level 3.

How do I get good at adjusting/homebrewing creatures? I wanna use some humans for my party to fight against and don't just wanna use 8 MILLION BANDITS, but everything other than that is way too high level for them to fight.

ranger is essentially a fighter/rogue/druid multiclass in 5e. Its biggest problem is its lack of identity.
I realize this doesn't help you any way, but i just wanted to say it.

What level are your players? A simple way to do it would be to give the humanoids PC classes.

Get your enemies to all stand within 10ft of a point and use volley.

>How do I get good at adjusting/homebrewing creatures?
Don't. just reskin and replace.
Give bandits different weapons, use orcs, goblins, kobolds, say they are human. etc.

Take bandit stats, change their weapons armor and say they're something else