/5eg/ - Fifth Edition General

D&D 5th Ed. General Discussion Thread

>Unearthed Arcana: Greyhawk Initiative
media.wizards.com/2017/dnd/downloads/UAGreyhawkInitiative.pdf

>5etools:
astranauta.github.io/5etools.html

>/5eg/ Alternate Trove:
dnd.rem.uz/5e D&D Books/

>Resources Pastebin:
pastebin.com/X1TFNxck

>Previous thread:
Does anyone here actually read Dragon+?

Other urls found in this thread:

a.uguu.se/4JHeyGGjpuVg_items.7z
twitter.com/AnonBabble

I'm making one, but it's sprites.
and by making one i mean ripping them all from existing resources

Here's an alternate question for the 99% of you who haven't:
What's your favorite multiclass, not because of powerful synergies but because you think it's a cool concept?

a fighter 1 rogue x
he's just a rogue in plate armor thus disadvantage on stealth rolls

Bard/Druid.
>let me sing you the song of crop rotation

Monk/Cleric, but other than needing the same stats, they don't really sync well

>Bard/Warlock
'Cuz it's the Pick of Destiny, Child. Sold my soul for music 'cause I'm fucking insane.

The problem is it's the powerful synergies that make the concept.

For example, you could have played a sorlock wanting to be.. Whatever you'd expect the combination to be, but instead you become an EB turret because of the synergy.

I'm a little confused to how to word it but I don't think 'not because of powerful synergies' is what should be said. IT should be 'What's your favorie multiclass, not because of the multiclass's power but because it creates a cool concept?'
Not that there's much difference. You'd expect a barbarogue to be a thug, and that's how it is. You'd expect a sorcadin to be a magic-focused paladin, and it is. It's just a few stray cases like sorlock don't fit what you'd expect from them.

Arcane Trickster/Bard. Fun for supportive spells out of combat and when I don't feel like doing damage

Fighter/Fighter

So is there a way to go super saiyan in character for dramatics? So far I'm thinking a Barbarian with Thaumaturgy, a friend using illusion magic to produce a bright glowing aura, and another causing a storm.

>The problem is it's the powerful synergies that make the concept.
That seems highly subjective.
I think a druid/rogue is a cool concept; a thief or assassin that transforms into cats or panthers to sneak in and do her thing. But there's absolutely no synergy in the rules for it - even a level 1 rogue sneaks better than any beast, and you can't sneak attack with natural weapons as far as I know.
Sorlock, meanwhile, has no interesting concept in my mind beyond what it does mechanically, so to me it's completely boring. Ditto for sorcadin, for that matter.

Favorite Cleric domain, go.

Protector Aasimar

Visually I think a phoenix sorc does it with mantle of flame. The super saiyan aura is described as being like golden fire and golden yellow flames from the mantle would fit quite nicely. It even makes your eyes glow, although red instead of green. Hell I imagine the updraft from the heat of the fire around you would make your hair float upwards too.

I love warlock/paladin unironically, and had since 4e.

Fighter/Wizard. Outmagic other fighters and outfight other wizards. Action Surge OP.

How do I justify healz once magic has been stripped from the world?

where i come from we call that medicine

Hey guys I was thinking of a cool homebrew race I wanna play because my DM rejected my last concept because "it doesn't fit the lore of his world" (A.K.A. Pure autism).

Half-Mimic:

Born from combining the blood of a Mimic and a willing human sorcerer.

Strenght +2 Con +1
Speed: 30
Darkvision 60 feet
Shapechanger. You can use your action to polymorph into an inanimate object that you have seen, or back into your true form. Your statistics remain the same in each form, but you can only assume the shape of an object of Small or Medium size (such as a chest, chair, door or table). While you remain motionless, you are indistinguishable from that object. Any equipment you are wearing or carrying isn't transformed, but is contained within you as long as your shape has the dimensions to accommodate it (For instance, it's easier to contain a sword in a table than in a footstool). You revert to your true form if you die.
Adhesive. Whenever a Large or smaller creature touches you while you are in the shape of an object, you can use your reaction to attempt to grapple that creature.

Acid bite: as a bonus action once per short rest can bite 1d4 piercing + strenght +1d4 acid

Languages: Common + one of your choice

What do you think, is it balanced?

Yeah but that's kind of a hard sell mid-combat, even more so at range.

Like, what, does he just throw gauze at your face?

conventional wisdom usually holds that mid-combat healing is not worth it anyway

This is fresh pasta isnt it.

don't call it magic then, call it divine intervention... assuming there's still gods?

Warlord, obviously

That's why HP is abstracted to be morale, coordination, and fighting spirit as well as stab wounds.

But muh meat points

I hope it doesn't become pasta
The bait is so blatant it's insulting

Fey warlock, Oath of ancients paladin. I want to be a fighter that got powers in exchange for protecting something Fey. A true green night with a tangible liege.

If you want everything to be functionally identical before and after magic is stripped from the world, why are you doing a campaign where magic is stripped from the world?

I'd say that it's a permanent antimagic zone everywhere and leave it at that. Maybe even take it a step further and use one of the variant rules for slow healing (because it was the latent magic of the world that let people get back up from any injury after an hour of rest and be fully recovered after only two days.)

But user, why would you protect the fey? They're jerks.

Here, user, I made a thread for you:

>'What's your favorie multiclass, not because of the multiclass's power but because it creates a cool concept?'
That's just as bad, though I don't think either are bad enough to warrant changing. I think what you're looking for is "what's your favorite multiclass in terms of flavor, not taking into account mechanics?"
I like fighter/monk because it mechanically allows me to use maneuvers and action surge as a monk, in flavor I like being able to use a spear as a dex fighter.

Sometimes. The article about the all-feline setting was pretty cute and had some neat little things.

So are gods and religion is far from dying

Probably Sorcerer/Rogue. I always liked Sorcerer as far as spellcasting goes, and mixing that with the more nimble and stealthy aspects of a Rogue seems like a really fun time.

The era of Alchemy.

Going to play Out of the Abyss.
What are some fun classes for this adventure?

How do you all map out your dungeons and other arenas and whatnot? Do you use a particular program? Is there even any color? How detailed do you get?

Actually, what's the the best way to build or flavor this?

Half elf, dump str to 13, max con/ cha. Pact of tome 3 (4), pala x
shillelagh + EB with agonizing blast
War caster + resilent and focus on casting on the frontline.
Mercenary with a silver tongue who trades security services for more power and casting knowledge
or
Human 16/16/16/9/9/9 or 15/8/15/8/10/14 + feat, pact of blade 4, pala x
using the thirsting blade invocation, PAM + Sentinel. Gives 3 attacks at level 8, use EB with agonising blast at range.
Primarily use buffing casting and smites.
Was raised by elves and was given a wonderful magic weapon and bow by their ancestral god in exchange for his loyalty.

Because they're charming and give gifts. Or maybe It's because I'm a jerk too, who knows?

I use graph paper because I'm not a lazy faggot

Shadow Monk will shine very well in the underdark

I bought this huge fucking mat that you can draw on and it erases with a bit of water so you can re-draw designs over it.

Getting your players to not draw dicks all over it though is the real challenge.

Same here, man. I may be a faggot, but I'm not lazy!

>shine

i got one of those vinyl grid maps, though I need one of the bigger ones soon.

i got a few cheap blocks of squared paper, where i draw rough travel maps and town layouts, aswell as battlemaps, where i count 4 squares on paper as 1 square in battle, aswell as complete or parts of dungeons, and then i write down notes for it, like traps and DCs, desired outcomes, special interactions between enemies and enviroment (a fun little thing is to have chandeliers in a room, and a dude just waiting for the party in the middle of the combat to walk under it before cutting it down.

then i got a binder, under which i got "dungeons" "town maps" "battle maps" and "campaign maps/other" in separate tabs, ordered oldest to newest.

npc names and other """hard facts""", goes in the binder, looser things such as quest notes, ideas, session notes and such goes into a small notebook i got by the side.

Shadow monk, revised ranger 3. Teleport around in the underdark with your panther.
Bonus: Be a good drow and use twin shortswords

Well, the thing is, the only mechanical synergy between druid and rogue is turning into an ape and sneak attacking or using wild shape for stealth and using pass without trace.
Which, even if it's not the best combination, creates what you were expecting there.

It's not about power, it's about what the most powerful set-up with that combination is that everybody will tend towards.

If you play sorlock you could choose not to take eldritch blast at all, but then it just feels like you're being silly. Naturally, all sorlocks will gravitate towards eldritch blast spam as it's the only thing that makes sense, and that synergy creates the base for a charater concept.
A possible character concept would be some sort of wizard who has completely ignored general studies for a hard focus on combat magic and has even made pacts with otherworldly beings in order to enhance their combat magic. The sort of guy who sees magic as only a tool for controlled destruction.

>I think what you're looking for is "what's your favorite multiclass in terms of flavor, not taking into account mechanics?"
That doesn't really work, either.
The deal is that the flavor has to really take into account mechanics, otherwise you try to be a flying kung fu jackie chan drunken master who actually can't handle booze and can't fly and can't do all the cool things you wanted your character to do.

Meant for this

Whoops, failed to link that last paragraph.

Basically my problem is just that you kind of have to base things off of mechanics or synergy or else you're playing a character that isn't your character.

Dragon +, no not really.
The initiative idea is cool, but man does it slow down things and makes people look like idiots. I like the original one, you roll and wait for your turn like in a JPRG game, simple and quick.

So, it's all in black and white? Just the basic walls of the room, or are you detailing tables, sandbags, et cetera? And how do you denote a second floor or balcony without it covering the lower layer? And how do you properly convey the atmosphere of the area without any real art of which to speak?

>It's not about power, it's about what the most powerful set-up
Those mean basically the same thing.

>Naturally, all sorlocks will gravitate towards eldritch blast spam
Maybe not. Not all players are trying to optimize their DPR/efficiency. Just because you play that way (and there's nothing wrong with that) doesn't mean it's universal, which is what you don't seem to be getting.

>The flavor has to really take into account mechanics
Well, no, those are separate things.

Your whole post is predicated on the assumption that we're talking about mechanics. But we're not. The question is "what two classes do you think are super cool together flavorwise, regardless of mechanical strength?" You can keep bringing up specific mechanics and combos, but you're not answering the question. You're changing the topic of discussion without addressing it.
Note that the question didn't ask if you'd actually play said character. Just... what do you think is cool?

kek I almost forgot their healing was Martial in nature
So my party was once transported to a place where arcane and divine powers were warded off and we had no rouge so I had to charge forward trying to look for traps and healing us

>Getting your players to not draw dicks all over it though is the real challenge.

Rolling up a paladin for my friend's game, and I'm stuck for how to make them interesting. I want to take the Oath of Devotion, and be the iconic paladin, but with a fun twist. I don't have a background chosen either.

I was leaning towards a depressed, drunkard holy warrior, but I figured Veeky Forums might have some more interesting ideas.

>I figured Veeky Forums might have some more interesting ideas.
I think you might've mistaken us for someone else.

err Noble background and is the son of a cleric or Paladin but he's rather pious and strict wheras you're more a youthful brash semi idiot?
Comes with meh facial hair and an attraction to dames and drink
You could have a character arc about growing up to be your own warrior/hero or whatever

>Those mean basically the same thing.
The difference is one is about 'Oh, sorlock is really powerful, but monkwizard is weak' and the other is 'Oh, sorlock is really weak if you play it like this, but really strong if you play it like this'
The first is about power of the multiclass set up right, the second is about what the most powerful set-up for a particular multiclass is.

>Maybe not. Not all players are trying to optimize their DPR/efficiency. Just because you play that way (and there's nothing wrong with that) doesn't mean it's universal, which is what you don't seem to be getting.
The essential gist there is that the player is purposefully nerfing themself if they don't pick that. Not in a 'why don't you pick wizard? It's the most powerful class even though it fills a different role' but in a 'why don't you pick shadow monk instead of wrath of the four elements? Four elements does nothing.'
So when you think of a monk in 5e, you never think 'Oh, is is a wrath of the four elements monk? Those are really cool!' but rather you're surprised if it is, and then it's more of a 'why do you hate yourself?'
When taken back to the sorlock, this is 'Oh, you're a sorlock, so you like EB spamming all the time I guess? What, you decided to try to defy what that class means? What, you decided to nerf yourself on purpose? Well, I guess.'
The multiclass is practically defined by EB spam, but you can try to play outside that definition.

There are two ways to go about it:

Half Elf going 16/10/14/8/12/16, starts Paladin and proceeds first 6 levels as normal grabbing PAM at 4th, then MCs to Warlock for 3-4 levels before going back to Paladin (then does more Warlock after PLD 12). This is standard Paladin stats, lets you wear heavy armor, it's solid, the only difference is you bump CHA instead of STR because you'll be switching to Shillelagh combat.

The alternative is kinda what you described, VHuman 13/14/13/8/10/16 grabs Resilient (CON) to round up 14, starting with 1 level of Paladin is higher net HP but otherwise their first levels are going 3-4 into Warlock before switching to Paladin. Until you get Extra Attack, plays like a standard Warlock (EB turret) but with Medium Armor and Shield and normal spell slots.

In absolute terms, you're trading +1 AC for +2 DEX saves, and I'd say the latter is the better way once you're all up in levels but if you want to smack and smite from the beginning, starting Paladin is how you do it.

If you don't have a background, you could potentially go with Urchin or Criminal and have them be someone who once stole to survive before turning to their Paladin ways.

Maybe he was forced into his class via his family with high expectations. A reluctant paladin that doesn't want to be a paladin, but does so because he feels obliged to

Sorcerer / Ranger.
It's never made sense to me that rangers had spell casting, it makes a little more sense if they were randomly born with magic powers.

>Well, no, those are separate things.
They are not seperate.
If you do not base your flavour on your mechanics, you get... I don't fucking know.
You get a guy with ice control and ice powers and shoots ice beams everywhere mechanically but the flavour is they're this fire elemental that really likes burning stuff.
It doesn't work.

>"what two classes do you think are super cool together flavorwise, regardless of mechanical strength?"
This is what it should be, but it's not.
The original question was worded 'What's your favorite multiclass, not because of powerful synergies but because you think it's a cool concept?' which implies class synergy has no impact on the flavour.

The way you worded it just then implies mechanics can have some affect on flavour, though if I want to be really pedantic I should point out again that mechanical strength still has some level of relevance as if one class option is mechanically way stronger than the other then it will define the standard of what you expect from a multiclass.

And the original question doesn't actually imply that it's the way YOU want to play the multiclass. It's just 'what multiclass is a cool concept?
If you say 'sorlock' then almost anyone will think 'Oh, you mean EB spam'.
If it was 'what multiclass build is a cool concept?' then it could be some other way of playing it.


Yes, I had to make a two post long thing to explain this whole petty fuss I'm making.

What kind of stuff is even contained within Dragon+?

>though if I want to be really pedantic

You're well past that point. You're the only one who had any issue understanding what he meant.

A tie between Light, Tempest and War

When I think of ranger "spellcasting," I think of Aragorn. He puts his ear to the ground, listens, and can tell that there are orcs nearby. He's so familiar with plants and herbs that he can use them in ways that most people can barely fathom.
When I cast my ranger spells, I try to provide a non-flashy description. Detect Magic is simply having really finely tuned sense. Hunter's Mark is a frame of mind.
That said, a ranger born with arcane powers could be a very interesting character.

I see where you're coming from, but at the end of the day, you can be pedantic about my phrasing or you can accept the question for what it was meant to be.

It's not an issue of misunderstanding. I think you're the one misunderstanding, really.

As said, it's 'what multiclass is a cool concept' not 'what multiclass build is a cool concept'.
However, what a multiclass concept is is defined by its mechanics and synergy.

The original question is like asking 'What cake do you like, not for the ingredients it's made out of but instead for the flavour?'

I mean, I've gotta find something to complain about in /5eg/ every thread or else I'll wither away or something.
I might just be an argumental masochist at this point.

>However, what a multiclass concept is is defined by its mechanics and synergy.
This is the exact point where you're wrong. You could have gotten that as soon as you saw the first few answers (bard/druid, monk/cleric).
A better analogy would be "what sort of cake do you like, not for its flavor but for its appearance?"

No, it's like asking 'what's your favorite car, not because of mechanical power but because you think it's cool?'

Sure, someone might argue that the most powerful car in the world is cool because of that and that's why it's their favorite, but the implication is clear that they're not just asking about what the best car is, but also what people like on a more personal level.

And yet here you are, trying to turn it around and act like everyone else is misunderstanding and you're the only one who knows the truth.

Look how many replies to the post their are that didn't get confused like you did or feel the need to rant about how the question was technically wrong.

Yeah you're right, I do think synergy is a decent thing to exclude though. Fighter and wizard MCing is awful beyond level 2, while sorc/pally is pretty decent at several splits. That's pure synergy and loss/gain from MCing, while it would make some sense in the flavor each class comes with that a wizard/fighter equal split might result in the equivalent of EK for example.

Post it here when you're done, please. I was thinkng of using something like ToME tileset as well.

I wish ranger spellcasting was that way, but when they turn their skin into tree bark or shoot arrows made of lightning it kind of breaks the idea for me

I need help finding a dungeon to use for today's one-shot.

THe party is going to be going into a place where Water Elementals and Cultists are sending Undead to assault a port city.

Any ideas on what to include in the dungeon? Or any reccomendations for premade dungeons to look at/modify?

How is this triggering? It is quite balanced IMO.

You could potentially make a pretty scary and difficult dungeon with lots of sections and passages designed to flood with water, where skeletons that don't need to breathe can move more freely.

im and i should add that this is just my notes, when it comes to actually being in-game, we got a large vinyl map that we draw on with removable markers


>So, it's all in black and white
yes

>Just the basic walls of the room, or are you detailing tables, sandbags, et cetera?
i usually also make sure to draw #1, things that might be relevant/ hindrances during combat
#2, things that might be relevant and show the "purpose" of the room, ie, stovetop and kitchen counter for kitchens, racks and crates for the armory and #3 things that the players might take an interest in/ that i want them to take interests in, maybe a chest or something of the sort, all of these are very simple abstractions to keep it as clutter free as possible


>And how do you denote a second floor or balcony without it covering the lower layer?
the house is..... lets say 10x12 squares, you draw 10x12 squares on a paper, mark it as "floor 1", then you draw under that square, or get a new sheet if it's too large, draw 10x12 and mark it "floor 2"


>And how do you properly convey the atmosphere of the area without any real art of which to speak?
because i bloody well came up with the place and should thus be able to describe it to my players, if i need anything extra i make small notes upon general themes which i try to "enforce" when i describe it, besides, just how things "look" is a very shallow way of enforcing atmosphere. the drawings are just to translate it into crunch and to make sure that it "works". when it comes to describing something to enforce an atmosphere i always use "what does it look like, what does it sound like and what does it smell like, along with a faint "nudge" towards what the character would probably feel like in this place" "sight then sound then smell" is a great mantra for describing most things.

Only if you don't know what the multiclass is.
When you know 5e well enough and you hear someone say 'I want to do an X/Y multiclass' all the reasonable synergies come to mind.
For example, if you said to someone who didn't know 5e at all 'What do you think of druids?' they might not say 'they shapeshift!' at all. But when you talk to a 5e person and say 'What do you think of druids?' they would know that shapeshifting is a core part of their class. To ignore that it's a core part of their class is to fail to make appropriate flavour.

So
>"what sort of cake do you like, not for its flavor but for its appearance?"
Only works as an analogy if you don't know 'the cake', because appearance is all you have to go off of. Otherwise, there's more to the cake than appearance asked from the question.

That only works if 'mechanical power' refers to all parts of the car. For example, the ways the doors open, the engine, dashboard interface, how large it is, etc.
And that makes up most of the reasons why you'd think it's cool aside from the paintjob they've done over the mechanics and the brand name, pretty much.

Well, when you think of a fighterwizard you would think '1/2 levels of fighter and rest wizard levels' rather than various splits, because that's what you expect and what almost always happens, and they always have armour and surge. Sorcerer-paladin is a bit weird but always has at its core 'smiting more' and some quickening/twinning perhaps.

they get magic from nature, it's not a stretch

I think once they reach high enough levels to do those things it's okay to say they've studied nature long enough to develop a magical connection like druids do. The important thing is that low-level rangers don't do anything overtly mystical.
But yeah, there's a reason "spell-less ranger" is basically the most popular/requested variant in any edition of D&D.

That's a good idea. Somehow I didn't even consider that undead don't need to breathe.

Rate my magic item, 5eg

ARMOR OF ANIMANUS
(Plate Armor, Requires Attunement)

This armor resists radiant, necrotic, and all non-magic slashing, bludgeoning, and piercing damage. Once attuned, the wearer of this armor can use one of the following abilities once per day.

a) Army of Armor: summons up to four Animated Armors (MM p. 19), each one wielding one martial melee weapon chosen for it by the wearer. These armors are loyal to The wearer, obey their orders, and do their best to protect the wearer from harm. The summoned armors are active for twelve hours before they and their weapon(s) dissipate into radiant energy and disappear.

b) Animanus's Embrace: transforms the wearer into the equivalent of a Helmed Horror (MM pg. 183) as if using the druid's Wild Shape feature, except that the player will always retain their own equipment, weapon(s), and/or shield. While transformed, the wearer is immune to radiant damage.

Seems fucking overpowered as fuck. It is on the level of legendary items, or higher.

This might be a retarded question, but is there a program that makes mapping this shit out any easier than just abusing the line tool in photoshop? Something that lines it up to a grid so I don't have to pinpoint that shit?

How to Arcane Trickster?

>When you know 5e well enough and you hear someone say 'I want to do an X/Y multiclass' all the reasonable synergies come to mind.
OK, now stop thinking like that and then you understand how everybody else is addressing this discussion.

>shapeshifting is a core part of their class
Right, and I'm not arguing against that; if you recall, I used it in an example about a cool rogue/druid. But the point is that knowing what the class is about doesn't mean you have to think about the exact way its mechanics work. I can think of a druid as a shapeshifter without thinking about the text of Wild Shape as it appears in the PHB.

>There's more to the cake than appearance
I'm asking you specifically to describe a cake you think is pretty. If you can't do that, just don't answer the question. The thread is big enough for multiple discussions.

>When you think of a fighterwizard you would think '1/2 levels of fighter and rest wizard levels'
For the last time (hopefully) - NO, that's what YOU would think. The whole point is that everyone else is thinking of fighter/wizard in a very general sense - armor and sword and spellslinging, maybe pointy ears. You don't have to go deeper than that when deciding a concept is cool.

>Well, when you think of a fighterwizard you would think '1/2 levels of fighter and rest wizard levels' rather than various splits
Yes but this excludes synergy hence it removes those assumptions. Without synergy, sorcadin is NOT about smiting with sorc slots, it's about a holy knight having sorcerous powers, using those arcane spells in conjunction with his holy magic and with two power sources often having some interesting stuff come from that (more prevalent with pallock).

Campaign Cartographer?

Remove one of those effects.

somebody was using rpg maker to make maps then screenshot-paste into gimp

Well to be fair, the eponymous Animanus is a legendary animated armor that ascended to a paragon godhood in its own right after being awoken by a goddess of protection to serve as her sentry.

That seems way more complicated than what I need.

I just need to be able to make walls, doors, stairs, and shit, with basic black lins.

Take spells that will help your stealth and infiltration. No damaging spells, your ranged attacks will do more damage and be more accurate. Disguise self and minor illusion are both incredibly helpful

>That only works if 'mechanical power' refers to all parts of the car.

Except he also said 'powerful synergies', not just 'any synergy you can think of regardless of how good it is'

Is it so hard for you to wrap your head around the idea that he was asking more about fluff rather than crunch?

>OK, now stop thinking like that and then you understand how everybody else is addressing this discussion.
We're in a goddamn /5e/ thread, no way I'm not going to think of it in the context of 5e.

>But the point is that knowing what the class is about doesn't mean you have to think about the exact way its mechanics work. I can think of a druid as a shapeshifter without thinking about the text of Wild Shape as it appears in the PHB.
Then you make a druid who turns into a dragon using their wildshape flavour-wise even though mechanically they can't?

>I'm asking you specifically to describe a cake you think is pretty. If you can't do that, just don't answer the question. The thread is big enough for multiple discussions.
Yeah, but it's still a case that sounds like 'Not regarding the things that make the cake pretty, what cake is pretty?'
Which could have honestly just been a 'This is stupid' 'well yeah you're a fag answer the question' but the thing is it's not really easy to explain so I kinda failed to explain that properly and so now we're in a thread-long discussion I guess.

>For the last time (hopefully) - NO, that's what YOU would think. The whole point is that everyone else is thinking of fighter/wizard in a very general sense - armor and sword and spellslinging, maybe pointy ears. You don't have to go deeper than that when deciding a concept is cool.
But when you play that multiclass, that's not what you get. Because this is 5e, not some other edition.

This would be fine then, if we were talking about D&D in general, but it seems weird to come to a 5e thread to talk about D&D multiclass concepts in general and not 5e multiclass concepts.

5e sorlock IS about EB spam unless you purposefully fight against the meta. In D&D and general it might be something different.

>Then you make a druid who turns into a dragon using their wildshape flavour-wise even though mechanically they can't?
You're either missing the point of everything I'm saying or being obtuse on purpose.
No, I'm imagining a druid turning into a fucking cat to steal jewelry. Except the rules make that really suboptimal. Except, when talking about fluff, I DON'T CARE.

Other than that, I'm done. It's clear you'd rather perpetuate an argument about semantics than participate in a discussion about class combination fluff, which is literally all I wanted to do.

All of these will have to be resized once placed as tokens in Roll20 because I'm not gonna fuck around with proper sizing beforehand. They also added a token recolor option which is pretty good for getting variants of stuff or making things blend better.
a.uguu.se/4JHeyGGjpuVg_items.7z

Warlock is about contracting with a powerful outsider for magical power. Sorcerer is about being born with power. Both of those things are inherent to 5e.
So it's possible (albeit strange) to think of the combination as "someone who was born with power, and then made a deal with a powerful outsider to learn how to use it better." Specific spells don't even have to come into the discussion.
I respect that this is not your personal mindset, but why is it so hard for you to understand, and why can't you just let people who do hold that mindset have a discussion about it?