/5eg/ - Fifth Edition General

I restrict it based on setting and tone.

Like for Eberron I'm not allowing aarakocra or goliaths kenku or what have you, but I'm more apt to allow goblinoids, lizardfolk, and (my homebrew versions of) shifters and changelings and warforged.

How would you feel about allowing players to have two classes for one character? I don't mean multiclassing. I mean actually leveling two classes but only being able to use one at a time. Like it requires a long rest to change class. I'm trying to think of a way to justify it in game though. I feel like it'll allow people to swap out roles and try out new things without requiring a new character.

Let's assume my table wants to do something about healer whack-a-mole and the ideal method of healing being to let a target reach 0 first and then pull them back up.

What are some ways to incentivize in-combat healing WITHOUT penalizing going to zero? So none of that "you get exhaustion" or "use the Vitality system" or "your max HP is reduced by 1/4th or any of that.
How do we just make healing GOOD?

Anyone has a link to the critter compendium?

I don't think I agree.
The warlock is very setting-dependent. Not necessarily because of the class itself, but because each pact depends on a type of patron (archfey, archfiend, etc.) actually existing.
The sorcerer relies on magic being something that can be inherent to a person. Some settings may not have that.
Bards and paladins derive their powers from sources (music and faith, respectively) that may not be able to grant such powers in a given setting. The character archetypes would definitely still exist, but they would be represented as rogues and fighters.

>Lizardfolk War Cleric of the Sun

I'm really feeling it. What about you, soft-mouth?

They make good Fighters and Rangers. Especially DEX Fighters thanks to the natural AC and more ASI's to make up for low starting DEX.

I think it's fine for like a level or two so players can see if they like a class/race. After level 2 or 3, I'd make them commit until their character dies.

Never, I don't like restricting my players like that. It helps that my setting is very kitchen sink as well

I mean I could see it in a Cyberpunk game, but maybe not fantasy... Wait, maybe instead of downloading new class information into your brain implants, you could use a magical form of that, something that is a part of the setting. Like a guild of wizards who make cash by implanting skillsets into people's heads... they obviously can't raise your skill, maybe because people only have a certain capacity for skill (a.k.a. their XP).

>Do you ever restrict race options in your games? How about classes? How about race/class combinations?
My setting only has Humans, Elves, Dwarves, Orcs, Halflings, and Gnomes. But it's a custom setting.
If I were playing in FR I'd open it all up, though obviously monstrous races in a party would preclude the group from going to a lot of places or interacting favorably with most people.

Does their racial AC stack with the Unarmored Defense from Barbarian or Monk?

yes because their armor is Natural armor which stacks with monk AC bonuses

Would you still go 2hand or Sword & Board, or is dual wielding decent now?

I am the guy who posted about the awful DM, and just so you know I am not saying everyone who restricts classes and races are bad DMs, just that this bad DM did that. Just so you know.

No. All AC calculations replace each other, they do not stack. If you have multiple features that say "your AC is X+Stat", you get to pick one.

A Lizard Redemption Paladin / Monk / Barbarian with Mage Armor gets only one AC calculation.

I don't think it really requires an in-game justification, but I would limit it to one change per session. Ultimately, the game should be about having fun and if David Davidson decides in the first session that he really hates playing a Warlock or whatever, he can change it without having requiring some half-assed justification for the character leaving and the new character being introduced.

I missed that entire discussion if it happened last thread so I don't take offense.
As an aside, I could put Dragonborn in my setting, but no one would play them anyway.
i'm also not using racial stats

Came here to clarify that if an artificer infuses something with a spell that requires concentration, the person using the infused equipment has to make the concentration check.

NO NO NO ABSOLUTELY NOT THIS IS NOT 3.PF

No. It's an alternate calculation. There is almost no form of AC stacking in 5e except shields.

The person that uses the infused spell maintains concentration with all the rules associated with it.

So, what the opinion on a monk jumping 60+ feet

Well, I was just responding to user asking for a justification, not saying you necessarily need one.

Gotcha. So to make the most out of it you'd want to do a Cleric, Cleric/Wizard, dex Fighter/Ranger, or just a land Druid?

THIS THREAD NEEDS MORE NUBIANS

No problem with that.

...

Gotcha covered, kouhai.

Outta curiosity does that include spell DCs? I assume it uses the artificer's DC, cinsidering a fighyer for example would not have one, even if they used the item.

I want to play a Kobold.
What are some viable ways to build one? I kind of want to make a ward.

*bard

DEX barbarian

Any druid is fine

Do you mean "make the most out of [the AC feature]"? Yeah, pretty much. Dex and Shield are your friends.

Sorry, I'm a different OP than the one who posts racial minorities. I like Oath of the Ancients Paladins more than I like starting fights on Veeky Forums.

whats the best way to handle 'ambush' type scenarios?

basically, what i want to do is this:
the players are travelling through a forest, and i want them to stumble into 'gnoll territory'. they will be subject to guerilla tactics and waves of gnolls, making the progress through the territory like a dungeon crawl of sorts (use of traps, hit and run, etc).

how do i do this if characters do not make active perception checks? just use their passive scores until they decide to go on high alert? i hate asking players to make perception checks, it breaks things up and makes it seem like they are missing things if they roll like crap.

oooohh intriguing, now I might make a character like that.

You'd want bow most likely, or Sword 'n' Board with a Rapier.

Describe the environment, occasionally drop subtle hints about gnolls if their passive perception is high enough. If they suspect something, give them a chance to explore more thoroughly or be on higher alert

Standard lore bard would work. Pack tactics should help with sunlight sensitivity, and when you aren't in sunlight, all your attack spells will have advantage as long as the sponge is next to the enemy

Super intriguing, but Rage only works with strength attacks.

What would/should elves think about guns? What about dwarves?

My DM would restrict certain combonations, as well as force characters upon players. Reason why i left his group

Modern magic settings are pretty fun.

Elves think they are pointless and needlessly destructive (why use that awful mechanism when a finely placed arrow can kill just as quickly) and dwarves think they're the coolest shit they've ever seen and often get drunk and go out hunting

Elves would be great with them but find them cruder and less fun than bows.
Dwarves would probably invent them.

Obviously, but D&D is poorly suited for them.

Is it possible to make a water-themed spellcaster in 5e? A hydromancer, if you will.

I was reading Volo's guide today, specifically the section on goblinoids, and more than a resource for depicting detailed dungeons and encounters for adventurers, the whole thing struck me as an amazing premise for an all-goblinoid adventure.
When goblinoids encounter each other under significant circumstances, they take it as a sign from Maglubiyet to form a Host. Then it says that a Host doesn't get really started until a permanent hobgoblin settlement packs up and hits the road, which grows and conquers territory, and with luck can eventually form a true nation. To me, this seems like the perfect level progression:

>lvl 1 gobbos meet up, form Host
>1~7: adventure to faraway/nearest hobgoblin garrison, try to convince hobbos it's a Host
>7~13: travel the land, building your force and waging skirmishes and battles
>14-20: form and manage a whole kingdom until it inevitably falls apart

Provided my players are willing to work within the confines of only hobgoblin, goblin, and bugbear as playable races, does this seem like a fun adventure campaign? Is the concept solid? Is it too narrow a scope?

Yeah I already said something to that effect, but mine was my first DM ever, and he killed my character out of spite, just because he didn't act exactly like the DM wanted.

Guns are terrible for tunnel fighting and the other narrow confines they normally engage in battle.

Elves would love guns once rifling and other advances are invented.

Triton sea sorcerer

Old generations stick to bows. New generations of elves make works of art out of the guns and make rifling work. Dwarves think they are too dangerous to use underground (awaking monsters and all of that).

Genasi

I can see elves falling for that autistic "muh lone cold calculating sniper" schtick

I'm running one right now, it seems alright.

>he thinks Dwarves give a shit about smoke when they have infravision and hang out around forges all day or hearing loss when they're banging hammers and screaming all the time
>he thinks arcing weapons are better in a cave with stalactites hanging off the ceiling everywhere
>he thinks Dwarves wouldn't go straight to medicine guns and completely bury anything at the far side of a narrow tunnel in lead

>humans throw machineguns and bodies at everything
>orcs only fire as prep for a bayonet charge, with affixed axe-heads

>medicine guns

IT'S THE CURE FOR THE GREENSKIN DISEASE

And the point eared disease too

"Grandpa, why do you keep preparing Sending spells? You know we have cellphones now, right?"

Who cares if some spells are obsolete?

Use these, they're great.

They would probably be annoyed with how loud they are. That's why they would be the first to invent silenced ones.

"You see Luthandriel, back in my days..."

Is there any reason to take a full blooded orc over a half orc?

Sending could definitely still be useful. It's definitely more secure than a text message or email. I was just thinking about how a modern teenager would react

youtube.com/watch?v=98HTgS85T0k#t=0m53
>you will never be a dwarven bandito-turned-revolutionary with a gatling gun
>or a redemption paladin with a cassock full of hand grenades

Half-orcs at this point are LITERALLY a eugenics scheme by orcs, so no.

If I wanted to make a fencer/duelist character woulf I be better off taking ranger or college of swords bard.
The idea is to use a rapier and no shield.

Is artificer any good?
Is it fun?

A Triton or water gensai sea sorcerer.

Battlemaster Fighter with a hand crossbow and crossbow expert (feat) is probably the closest thing.

Races: No gnomes or dragonborn ever. Monster races on a case by case basis. I hate half races but I allow them because I haven't come up with good replacements yet.

Classes: UA on a case by case basis, no mystic

It's mid-tier in terms of power.
"Do you like explosions?"

So far my homebrew has a shit ton of races, but only Human, Elf, Dwarf, and Orc are playable. There are also no half races, even though all of the player races can breed with each other. Children are whatever the mother is, with traits of the father. So Elf(Father)/Orc(Mother) would result in a more "traditionally attractive" Orc. Dwarf/Elf results in slightly stouter Elves that are capable of growing beards. Human/Dwarf makes slightly taller dwarves with less dwarfy beards. Orc dads make big strong, slightly fanged kids. etc.

It's pretty low in terms of power, and pretty limited in terms of what it can do. It can be fun if you've got a DM that is flexible with magic item creation in regards to them.

Never been a fan of Warlocks but I'm playing a Fiendlock refluffed to a Dragon patron in an upcoming game. Any advice for this?

>There are also no half races, even though all of the player races can breed with each other. Children are whatever the mother is
This is also exactly how I'm handling mine.

Borrow from Dragon Sorc.

Or, use something like seeker patron. Dragon gives you strength so you can go add exotic stuff to its horde.

Following Pokemon rules, I see.

The flumphs are true bros.

Is it better to be a EK or bladesinger as a gish?

More than you know.

But I want to be a Fiendlock for Fire.

Than borrow from pyromancer sorcerer

Or I could just play a Fiendlock like I was going to and ask for advice playing one?

Take fire spells

Rogue.
>Pack Tactics offsets Sunlight Sensitivity
>Sneak Attack deals bonus damage on whoever you're attacking, and if you're a kobold you'll already be double-teaming an enemy because of pack tactics

>when you take 3 redpills instead of 1 and the /pol/ hits hard

tfw no companeros
youtu.be/sF4qiSutUA0

Robe of Useful Items is pretty cool.

Though I do agree that there should be some better options in there. Some offensive stuff would be cool for those Artificers who want to play a more damaging game vs a more utility based one.

Beast Master Ranger. Both you and your animal give each other Pack Tactics meaning you both have INFINITE advantage.