/5eg/ - Fifth Edition General

>Illusion is always fun.
Not for everyone else at the table, no.

>>illusion is always fun.

>party member has to run through an ice storm spell aoe to escape a monster they are (wisely) running away from.
>that guy wizard makes him an opening with a reduce spell on a door that would get him around the ice storm
>salty when I let him before informing him the storm means he can neither see nor hear the party or the new entrance
>lock throws out deck of illusion card- it's a druid
>druid cleric's never seen before runs out of nowhere and leads cleric to safety in the nick of time

As a DM, I don't let my players multiclass unless there is some diegetic, in-character reason for the player's character to do so.

You're a Barbarian and want to multiclass into a Rogue? Cool. Tell me, why? Why is your barbarian suddenly appreciating the subtler approach? What convinced them to cool their rage and sneak from the shadows instead of charge headlong into battle? Where, or from whom, did they learn their thieves' tools proficiency and expertise?

You're a Warlock and you want to multiclass into a Sorcerer? Cool. Tell me, how does your sorcerous origin play into your warlock pact? Is your sorcerous origin unrelated, or was innate magic another gift from your patron? Is this power that your character bargained or yearned for, or was it a sudden and surprising development for them? How do their reconcile their new magic with their old?

And once these goals are established, the next session after a level-up will certainly be about roleplaying the ways that players come into their new abilities. We'd roleplay (or at least address) the barbarian learning new skills from the other Rogue in the party or from their unscrupulous ally in the city, and we'd deal with the sudden onset of sorcerous magic in the warlock, etc.

It sounds harsh, but it makes multiclassing—which is the sudden deviation of your character to another path—a meaningful event and character decision. Bringing these skills off of the character sheet and into the game world is more rewarding for roleplay, and of course and most importantly of all, it shuts munchkins right the fuck up. No, you cannot take some Frankensteinian abomination of multiclass and feat combinations unless you can tell me why and how your character went into every one of them.

What do you mean?

Just always attempts to make the spell as useless as possible when you cast it, to the point where using a fireball for a 3rd level slot is just always more worthwhile than using major image

I'd want to play in your games.

What book is Ghostwise halfling from?

SCAG

I'd say it's a sensible approach, except I've met DMs with the same attitude in 3.5, where being a single-classed caster was pretty great, while being a single-classed martial was literally Hell.

I like this way of doing it, but there's of course someone who wants everything at once instantly.

Have a (You) for acknowledging how interesting/intriguing the process multiclassing is supposed to be in-character.

See, the problem here is that you are treating character classes like it's some kind of university course, and where taking another class means you switched majors.

Have you considered, perhaps, that class levels merely represent the idiosyncratic progression of a particular character's abilities? A character is not simply a 'Fighter', a character is the whole mix of their background and pursuits.

Do you also not allow Fighters archetype into Eldritch Knights unless there's some diegetic, in-character reason for the player's character to do so? What about every other archetype in the system? Does that differ from your approach to multiclassing?

How does my theory crafting look? PHB + SCAG. No UA.

Damage: Barbarian 5, rogue x using sneak attack for main damage. Barbarian should either go bear, then bear totem for increased stickiness, wolf, then bear to help your companions fight enemies around you (his applies to ranged companions as well, who have disadvantage on the target you're grappling) or elk, bear to grapple, drag your companions, then shove prone so everyone can wail on them.
Since you have advantage from the enemy being prone, sneak attack would trigger every turn. Weapons would be a shortsword or whip, where whip trades off a little bit of damage for reach. Should be combined with sentinel for more battlefield control.

Battlefield control: Barbarian 1 for rage, 3 for primal path (same as above) or 5 for 2nd attack, rogue 1 for expertise, and fighter battlemaster x to manoeuvre your companions. The more barbarian levels, the more it hurts the battlemaster in later levels of the game.
I could use versatile weapon with a d8(d10) for damage, one handed while grappling, or two handed if not. Other options would be whip with sentinel, or tavern brawler for flavor. I get 2 attacks + action surge by level 11, and up to two attacks and an additional action surge if you go 1 barbarian and 1 rouge.

>Barbarogue memes
Eat shit and die.

cont.

MAD version: Barbarian 1, rogue 1. Monk X. Use barbarian's unarmored defence, and focus on STR, and then CON/ DEX/ WIS for the other ability scores.
Use str for attacks scaling with monk unarmed damage and grappling, decent attack progression, and focus on CON/ DEX for increased AC/ health, or WIS to get more out of monk abilities.
You can go open hand to free up an attack with shoves (DEX), heal yourself and Quivering Palm at 17.
WotS gives the ability to grapple, drag and teleport to your companions, shove prone and everyone wails on them.
Long Death increases your stickiness with temp HP, Hour of Reaping for no advantage or to people attacking you while grappling (WIS). Despite being MAD, this build "comes online" fairly quickly and does decent damage.

Feats: Charger to make use of your mobility and freeing up an attack from knocking them prone. Defensive Dualist to be more tanky.
Lucky for super advantage.
Martial Adept for more utility (tag-teaming) or superiority dice.
Sentinel to make us whip's reach and increase battlefield control.

The biggest problem is these builds don't really get good until later levels, and damage is still a bit behind other classes. But that's usually the price you pay for some more utility.

>the wizard who wants all the fucking spells right fucking now as opposed to creatively using what he's got

stop being autistic right now

Ditch Battle Master. It's hurting your progression on everything else.

Barbarian only gets their level 3 totem ability, 6 is trash and you aren't taking any more levels. You go Bear unless the rest of the party is melee, but if you want to support that you go more Barb rather than multiclassing into Rogue.

Sneak Attack requires a Finesse weapon. If you're one-handing, your only option is a Rapier.

>Do you also not allow Fighters archetype into Eldritch Knights unless there's some diegetic, in-character reason for the player's character to do so? What about every other archetype in the system? Does that differ from your approach to multiclassing?

If the player goes Eldritch Knight, then they've either received a spellbook or have been studying spells in their downtime. If they're going a Way of the Four Elements Monk (remastered, I'd hope, the poor soul), then they've been training all this time and finally unlock their elemental powers at third level.

I'm not asking for a novel-length explanation, just some justification, which can be retroactive (within reason, of course). I love it when people multiclass into warlock because playing out that patron pact is like a field day for the DM.

What I really like is when players tell me what multiclasses they plan to take, because then I can weave experiences that would justify those multiclassings into their adventures. Someone wants to multiclass into a Deep Stalker Ranger? Your next quest takes everyone deep into the underdark. Upon exiting and leveling up, the player's character has learned a lot about the land and proved themselves to be a surprisingly capable survivalist, having handled all the navigation, and hunting and foraging and such. That experience is where he learned his Ranger skills.

I only ask for these justifications the first time; they can level up either class however they want after that. I'm not going to hold them to the coals if they can't tell me where they earned that fourth Ranger level when they've been in a city for six weeks, that'd be excessive. Although a game where class levels are determined by what the players do, not what they claim to be, would be interesting if everyone agreed to it.

I do this too! It's good and worth the RP.

This is just trash.

Why are you taking a Barbarian level with Monk?
Strength Monk only works with Fighter MC.
Why Rogue? Grappling?

This is not even being MAD, you're spreading yourself super thin in terms of abilities.

I literally have it all explained from the get go.

Fighter -> Warlock is a fighter who wants magical power, and have constantly asked gods to grant it to him, but when no one answered, but when an older, unknown, and stranger God answered instead, he took the deal as a Warlock.

Warlock -> Paladin is a guy who found some strange being. A lady in the lake, who offered him, a lone exile wandering the woods, a mission, as well as power, in exchange for certain tasks.

Cut forward a few levels, and he has developed from a simple Warlock, to a full on Paladin, his path to the Lady granting him almost divine power, as he fights for his patron and the joys of the mortal world.

Monk -> Rogue is a guy who originally roamed the wilderness, brawling wolves and bears, wanting to become the strongest human around. After taking the cowardly route of the shadows, and slowly becoming less about honour and being the best, he picks up trap making and starts plotting, observing, and catching his targets off guard, never bothering to let them get a chance to fight back. The strongest predator is the one you never get to fight.

Cleric -> Bard is a cleric of Hlal.

Yea dude, now that's what I'm fuckin talking about. And you got it right, warlock multiclasses are always so damn fun, narratively speaking.

What's with the lack of single target blasts? There's maybe 4/5 across 9 spell levels and then cantrips are pissy damage.
I'm surprised there isn't a 1st level spell like 1d8+10 or something. That's more reliable than chromatic orb but less max damage and without the damage type utility.
Am I just shit at balance?

Players should either plan ahead for multiclassing and have it be a part of their backstory, or have it happen because of something that happened during the game, like a someone taking an oath when an ally is killed or the rogue teaching the fighter how to fight more dirty and how to use thieves tools during rests for a while

Sorcerers convert spell slots into double cantrip damage.

The potential for collateral damage is built into the balance of blasts. A single-target spell does less damage than a blast, but you know that spell is only gonna hit that one guy.

In order to use a blast, you have to coordinate with your allies to make sure nobody gets hurt when you dish out the big damage. Spell Sculpting from the wizards' School of Evocation aids in this.

You're a good guy.

>54138045
Why does Veeky Forums get so triggered? Of course grappling is a meme, doesn't mean it can't be optimized.
Fair enough 3, it is. Battlemaster is fine for utility (sacrificing damage). RAW whip would work as a finesse weapon, RAI that would be retarded.
One level of rogue for athletics expertise (grappling). Why doesn't monk work apart from being MAD? It has unarmed STR damage and multiple attacks at the cost of other class abilities.

As a newbie reading about multi-classing in the PHB I just assumed this was how it was supposed to work.

It is, it's just that a lot of people don't do this. Multiclassing at some tables comes out of nowhere.

Cleric -> Bard Is the choir master

The mindset of "there are no rules, only rule suggestions" is vanishing. More rolls for things that used to be pure rp and logic. Some people run it and play it as a strict dice rolling game moreso than a role playing game: partially why they cut back on so much bloat going from 3.5 towards 5. At least I HOPE that's why.

barbarian: I want to take a level in rogue.
dm: why and how?
b: Because It says I can and because I leveled.

That really only bothers me on the more background driven classes like sorcerer, paladin or warlock (ironically they all sort of multiclass well together). If someone wanted to play a pirate or bandit king type dude I wouldn't think twice about them playing a barbarian/rogue, or if they wanted to be an eldritch knight that focused more on magic I don't think taking levels in wizard after they've already learned magic really seems too immersion breaking

Whip has a point for Rogues who would not like being in melee. Barbarogue is tanky. It just wants more damage.

The Battle Master utility isn't worth it. If you want to grapple with battle master maneuvers then do Fighter / Rogue and deal with not having advantage, or Fighter / Bard.

Strength Monk doesn't work because of MAD.

Strength Monk that is also taking levels in two other classes crosses into further fucking over himself.

Monk that is just a martial artist and not a magical martial artist when?

Reliable single target damage is pretty much martials' entire reason for existing

I disagree with the battle master. You get (1d8(1d10)+1d6)x2 per turn is fine damage. Manoeuvres are nifty, especially since you effectively pinning one enemy down, or two if you sheathe your weapon at the cost of all damage. You could also use a whip or hand crossbow for more range if you don't give a shit about damage.

Hopefully never.

I'm not saying Battle Master is bad. Battle Master is amazing.

But if you're going Battle Master then do BM, not just dip it for the maneuvers in a fucking 3-way multiclass.

It bothers me when it pertains to something the character has never interacted with or has never shown any form of interest in.

Example, I had a barbarian who wanted to take levels into paladin so I asked him why, at the time he had no reason for it, so I told him, no. Later in the story, his character chose to do some soul searching it opened up a dynamic we never thought about when pertaining to this rough and tough barbarian, who is now on a quest to better himself, then and only then did I allow him to multiclass.
Funny story about this Barbarian/Paladin, he ended up getting tricked and got possessed by my game's major antagonist cult, got his soul trapped in a sentient Greataxe, fought against the party and ended up getting disintegrated. We like to think he is in a happier place after all that's happened to him.

I could see that being frustrating, but my experience is players usually plan their levels out in the first place, so multiclassing is usually something they have in mind from the get go, which makes it really easy to blend the classes together

You're right, but I'm arguing for a meme or specialised build. If I want to do X thing as my schtick, this would be most optimal way of doing it. While there are more optimal builds or classes, 5e is forgiving enough on those that aren't.

Open hand monk, refluff ki as stamina.

But you aren't.

Hell, you haven't even coherently worded the intended purpose of the build, just what you think in your head it can do.

How about you start with that?

Multiclass is the reason we can't have nice things. Designers have to keep track of every class interaction on the game.

I'm not a big fan of class concepts that are basically only for the purpose of saying it isn't done with magic, but I would like a fighter archetype that has some sort of gimmick similar to a monk's martial arts

Reposting in this new thread: Curse of Strahd question.

Players are hooked 'cause CoS is dope. I'm having fun making sure every character has a drive and something that "speaks" to them in Barovia.

One of them is a Dwarf Cleric of Life. The character is mostly loyal good, a bit grumpy, but willing to help people. He witnessed in horror the hag trading pastries for children event. "Holy shit they're all rotten to the core" were his words I believe.

Thoughts?
Specifically, are there NPCs in CoH that could be used to "entangle" this character even more?

I thought of the Abbot, but not of the other 2, thanks!

Instead of running a huge, "epic" campaign, is it valid to string together a bunch of shorter adventures into some semblance of a plot?

>be level 10 ranger
"I'll loose an arrow"
>Roll a 5 +7 which doesn't beat the AC
>"LOL YOUR ARROW MISSES BY A MILE AND HITS A TREE."

>implying a level 10 ranger would ever miss

Hey if I'm just starting 5e as a mostly new DM/mostly new players what stuff beyond the 3 core books should I be aware of?

>Specifically, are there NPCs in CoH that could be used to "entangle" this character even more?

the abbot in kresk. baba lysaga. maybe the priest quest in valaki?

Sorry your DM is shit?

Ops, you're totally right.
Your best with grappling in 5e is grappling someone, and shoving them prone, giving advantage on attacks against them. They can't get up unless they break your grapple first.

You'll want unarmored defence, at least two attacks (grapple, then shove in the same turn), advantage on strength checks from barbarian's rage, and expertise in athletics from rogue to make your grapples neigh unbreakable.

The problem becomes damage, or MAD ability scores. If you go rouge for damage, your sneak attack damage is significantly delayed by having to go barb 5 for two attacks, and a bit MAD for optimal armor.
If you go barbarian all the way, that works fine but you'll want dex/ con and rely on additional rage damage (d10+low str+rage damage), or use dex (rapier, d8+high dex mod) .

Fighter also works fine, giving you a decent attack progression, and you don't have to dip too deep into barbarian not hurting your manoeuvres. However, you still run into the armor/ damage problem.

The latter is much, much better for everyone IMO. Obviously depends of the DM but it's a lot easier for him, and it also allows for some 'timelapses' that can be salutary for the group (when someone cant get to a session) and for the story (sometime, nothing happens for a while).

I've tried "epic" and it's not my cup of tea at all, except maybe if I'm playing some awesome campaign (CoS, OotA, SKT)

nothing else. the 3 books are all you need. hell, the basic rules from the WOTC website are all you need.

have fun GMing! it is amazing. also remember that you'll do better every time.

You don't need to fuck with anything beyond those books until you and your crew are more experienced.

Shift in the wind? Slip on some slick ground at the last second? An unbalanced/warped arrow?

Course it helps to say that it hits and doesn't do any damage (bounces off armor) or that they dodged it for some "miss" attacks. Dex bonus is a part of ac for a reason.

You sound entitled as heck my dude.

If I might be so bold: I highly recommend the Lost Mines of Phandelver if you're all new.

If i'm a Battlemaster and take Martial Adept as a feat, is the Adept Die a d6 or is it the same as my other superiority die?

My advices to you:
- short (3-5 hours) sessions are better for everyone
- force yourself to take a 5-15min break at some point
- take notes of notable things each characters said/did (to NPCs, most likely)
- keep story/NPCs simple, clichés are preferable over super-complex-edgy-snoozefests (you are probably not a great writer (yet), and even if you are, that's not what brings everyone around your table)
- don't sweat the rules, try to be fair and use common sense (not so common uh)
- don't talk too much
- describing "what happens" in combat can be pretty cool if you have the imagination for it
- epic campaigns arent as good without a campaign book ( )
- try to be on top of the rules for combats, especially spellcasting (concentration and constitution saving throws) and attacks of opportunity

I probably forget a bunch but that's from the top of my head.

>You're a Barbarian and want to multiclass into a Rogue?

Pirate background. Finally starts to realize why everyone was singing about "With Cat like tread, upon our foe we steal..."

youtube.com/watch?v=WdJg6Duzzf4

>Playing SKT
>We get rushed through first 5 levels, pretty cool
>Running a Storm Sorcerer 4/Tempest Cleric 1
>We come across a group of weird looking people escorting a prisoner
>Something seems fishy, decide to tail them
>Remove chainmail for stealth, group still fails stealth check
>They attack us
>Second round, run up to one of them, booming blade, one shot him
>Stow weapon, run up to a group of three and quicken thunderwave, upcast to level 3, obliterate all of them
>Next round run up and upcast another level 3 Thunderwave at another group of three, including their leader, obliterate them

I am liking these Sorcerer abilities. Oh my, the damages.

It's the same as your other die.

>Ranger at that level
>Not being attuned to the wind's direction if it's significant enough to put off his aim
>Not checking his ammo to know if there's any fault in his ammo
>Dodging it somehow makes the arrow steer off wildly and hit a tree somewhere else? It's also heavily implied it didn't bounce off armour

He's not entitled, he's in his rightful place. No f fucking way an archer at that level would miss by that much unless he's an absolute goon. The DM could have at least said 'Your arrow deflects off of its armour' instead of 'lol your have seriously bad aim'

Try and come up with a explanation for the following multiclasses:

>Rogue-paladin-druid
>Wizard-ranger-cleric
>Bard-fighter-warlock

Is the implication that the classes were gained in this order?

I like multiclassing with two classes, but I've yet to come up with any interesting triclass multiclasses. The MAD gets out of control, even if there is some contrived fluff for such a clusterfuck.

You don't care about unarmored defense.

Barbarians already do DEX 14, max STR and what they can spare to CON. This is AC 17 with non-magical half plate. This is about as good as things get unshielded and without fighting styles.

If your priority is grappling, you only take 1 level of Rogue for Expertise (or the Brawny UA feat) and the rest goes into Barbarian, because you want more HP and Rages.

If you want to actually be a good and effective character beyond your gimmick, you take 3-5 levels of Barbarian and the rest goes into Rogue.

Action Surge is attractive to the gimmick if you want to double grapple or some shit, but maneuvers are not worth delaying either your access to higher level Barbarian abilities or your Rogue SA dice (which is going to be your damage scaling). If your really want Disarm in a pinch, just take Martial Adept.

>Rogue-paladin-druid
Druid who has made an oath to protect an powerful ancient fey site and uses cloak and dagger tactics to deal with trespassers?

It was pretty much random to be honest.

>Rogue-paladin-druid
Clever and cunning fighter sworn to protect life and nature

Can someone show me the rules of thunderwave?

Some of us think it's a cube in front of us that we position, others think that since it says "it's a 15 foot cube centered on you" it's more or less a cube with you in the center casting out 5 feet in all directions (that would make a 15 foot cube). This one has puzzled us since 5e came out.

>Rogue-Paladin-Wizard
High INT Thief that steals expensive books and reads them before flipping them at a fence because hey, might as well, right? Turns out magical tomes and texts sell for good coin, and for good reason.
Dunno about Paladin, maybe he got caught and swore an oath of redemption or something?

I have a picture that explains it...on my hard drive in the computer with a fried motherboard. But, the first interpretation is correct. Compare the wording to Thunderclap and you'll see the difference.

Thanks anons

...

Sorry, not sorry your perfect shot Ranger fag missed. Next time don't be shit at your job.

>lv10 ranger
>+7 to hit
>not +11
you're shit

Is there any official ruling on if Revenant actually lets you get back up from 0 each turn? I mean it's pretty obvious RAW but I'd like to be sure it's intended RAI.

Google isn't having any decent results (yet)

Probably sharpshooter

It's UA so it's hard to know what is intended and what isn't, but if you regain HP while at 0, you lose the Unconscious condition. Since the Revenant recovers 1 HP every turn while below half, I would say yes.

Could a fiend be forcibly converted to good if it was plane shifted to Bytopia?

Then there's the explanation right there. He overdrawed the bow to do maximum damage, hurting his aiming in the process.
I use a slightly autistic system to describe stuff. Say there's an EK in plate and shield, casting Shield. What the enemy rolls determines the description:
0-9: you dodge
10-19: your armour/shield absorbs the impact
20-24: the Shield magical barrier blocks the would-be hit

can you provide visual aids?

twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/691682429917011968

thank you

Is there a good reason not take Mountain dwarf over Hill Dwarf on a forge cleric?

Only argument i could find was the wasted armour profs vs the extra HP.

Depends what you want
Hill is better spells and more HP
Dwarf is hitting stuff harder

How do I Druid/Rogue? The idea of it's cool but I don't see anyway to get it to work.