What's the most overpowered build in D&D 5e, Anons?

The Extra Attack feature doesn't stack so it's a long time until they get those extra attacks from fighter.

You could, but aside from getting ASIs a little faster and action surge there isn't much in it for the first 9 levels

True enough. Rogue/barb is a bit weird though - I once ran an oathbreaker/hexblade. I managed to fluff it as "Aasimar ditches being a Paladin after discovering they don't have souls as an outsider, signs up to work for a primordial weapon". How would you fluff a rogue barbarian? Stealthy skillmonkey doesn't gel well with screaming berserker.

Battlemaster then?

>How would you fluff a rogue barbarian
Bandit or pirate are the first things to come to mind. Conan even had plenty of rogue elements to him. I consider it one of the more reasonable multiclass options in terms of fluff really

The Nuclear Druid.

Currently playing an assassin rogue/barbarian as a Lizardfolk. The idea is that he's a very stealthy and sneaky hunter until the time comes to strike at which point he's vicious and bloodthirsty.

Find Steed + Cone of Cold

what

Is that like the new Locate City Nuke?

Nothing that broken. It just means that you can doublecast your Cone of Cold when sitting on the mount provided by Find steed.

and it doesn't work

nope.
Cuz find steed works only on spells with you as a target.
cone of cold targets a cone, not you

We don't have a magic user at our table, but from what I understand the logic behind it is

>Area spells "target" is their point of origin
>Area spells with range self make you the point of origin
>Find steed allows you to let spells that target self apply to both

nope
target is where you cast a spell
if it's a cone, the target is a cone
if it's a person, the target is a person

if you haste yourself, a steed hastes as well
if you bless yourself, a steed is blessed too
even if you firebolt yourself, RAW you can firebolt a steed.
But no, a steed doesn't create a second cone of cold or fireball

from raw:
While mounted on your steed, you can make any spell you cast that targets only you also target your steed.

Only is the key word. Cones do not target only you

Not according to RAW

>a spell's description tells you whether the spell targets [...] a point of origin for an area
(PHB 204)
>Typically a point of origin is a point in space, but some spells have an area whose origin is a creature or an object
(PHB 204)
>Spells that creates cones [...] that originate from you also have a range of self
(PHB 202)

Cone of cold targets only you and affects people within it's cone.

I mean, noone in their right mind would allow it, but I don't think anyone ever allowed locate city nuke either. It checks out though, since
Cones target only you, just as fireballs target only their point of origin according to RAW. Affected people within the fireballs explosion were not targeted specifically, they are just affected.

why do you think that TARGET and RANGE are the same thing?
cones have POINT OF ORIGIN, that's not a target

Why isn't this in the general?

Target and Range are unified in spells descriptions, not in the rules regarding those two.

Pic related clearly states

>Every area of effect has a point of origin, a location from which the spell's energy erupts
and it continues to state the specific rules on how to deal with obstruction and such, all assuming that the energy flows forward from the point of origin.

And since point of origin and target have been equated in the introduction to targets as seen in the picture here
it checks out.

Put differently: You throw a fireball at a Bugbear, three Goblins standing directly around him. Your target is the tile the Bugbear stands on, the Goblins still get affected due to the fireballs effect (not range) of 20 feet. Neither the Bugbear nor the Goblins are the targets of this spell, they only get the effect applied to them.

5e is using natural language, so yes, the bugbear and the goblins are absolutely targets of your fireball, since you want to hit them with it. With your reading, sorcerer could twin all sorts of AoE spells, when in actuality, he can not.

Read the fucking book, bro.

No, they are not the targets. The whole segment on area of effect and targeting continuously uses "affected" and "targetted" in this way. This is done so that spells like Fire shield, that target you, don't need to target the attackers that strike you, which would lead to major wonkyness.

I certainly did. Affected and targetted are two things. I'd never allow this at my table, but unless you show me that the rules at any point declare affected creatures targets, this checks out.

first post best post

but it offers a concise breakdown of what targeting means. Horsecasting doesn't work.

reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/5ozpwj/jeremy_crawford_on_targeting_spells/

I'm still waiting for a convincing argument that Lore Bards aren't the best class period. Maybe not best at specifics, but overall. You don't even need the higher level spells at lower level thing, you are just that ridiculously useful in every single conceivable situation.

>Target and Range are unified in spells descriptions, not in the rules regarding those two.
bullshit
range is listed in every spell under "range" tab . Target is written in the description of the spell
It's completely different characteristics, RAW and RAI
I don't know who taught you to read if you see this:
> Every area of effect has a point of origin, a location from which the spell's energy erupts.
as this
> target of aoe spell equals it's point of origin

>I don't know who taught you to read if you see this:
See picture and explanation here
>A spell's descritption tells you whether the spells target [...] a point of origin for an area

>range is listed in every spell under "range" tab
No it ain't. A fireball does not cover a 150 feet area in flames.

>No it ain't. A fireball does not cover a 150 feet area in flames.
yes it does. You are again thinking that range is smth else
fireball's range is 150ft
it's target is point in space
it's AOE radius is 20ft
is this really that hard?
>See picture and explanation here
again
and again
and again
> A spell's description tells you whether the spell targets creatures, objects, or a point of origin for an area of effect (described below).
DESCRIPTION tells you
and description of cone of cold TELLS you that the target is CONE, not the point of origin
> A blast of cold air erupts from your hands. Each creature in a 60-foot cone must make a Constitution saving throw.

is reading really that hard?

Necromancy wizard, given enough preparation time. Command undead has long enough duration at high levels that you can maintain a skeleton army.

Aside from that the power gap in 5th edition is a lot smaller, so the difference between strongest not-"I'm behind 100 skeletons" builds and merely good builds is not that extreme. Wizards in general are still top tier, and warlock-sorcerer multiclass is also very strong.

>is reading really that hard?
No. I simply seem to not care as much. I'm not interpreting the rules as the author of that tactic, I was originally just explaining what it was supposed to be to some user who asked.

Your whole last post however uses target only once as a word, when talking about the point of origin of the fireball. The “trick“ this random person on the internet used was exactly that - finding the difference between target and aoe in RAW. This trick has been clarified to not work in erratas and interviews and again, I would never allow it at my table anyways. But I can see the train of thought that lead to it being conceived as a jest just like locate city nuke before it.

DM.

This.

Because generals are terrible, and me having to explain this has bumped the thread back to the top. Are you happy now?

I don't know who taught you this but you need to work on reading comprehension.

>Overpowered builds
The real fun of 5e isn't overpowered builds, it's silly ones.

Wizard 19, Mindbender 1?

Did this not get nerfed with the whole "in one turn you can only cast one spell plus one cantrip"?
I only bring it up because one of my players used to always "fireball *quicken* fireball" for until it was clarified, only casting one spell on one turn, others must be cantrips.

It dosen't apply to action surge. The rule you're referring to states that if you cast a spell with a bonus action casting time, if you also cast a spell with your action, it has to be a cantrip.

Meaning that dropping 2 levels in fighter gives you a better Quicken Spell than Sorcerer gets. It's stupid.

Thanks user

It's actually wu jen 6 wizard 14, but counting playtest material is probably cheating

Is English not your first language?

So the idea is to grapple people and carry them off?

Revised Ranger (Hunter) 5/Fighter (Battle Master) 3/Rogue (Assassin) 12

I think the idea is that you use the mobility to take to the air while grappling someone, then powerbomb them into the ground with falling damage when your movement runs out

Does being on top of them cushion your fall, or do you take the damage too?

What does this build contribute that makes it OP?

Depends on DM. But you are halving the damage anyway cause of rage, so that has to count for something.

I'm remember in the playtest stuff they mentioned getting immunity to fall damage while raging.

I thought it was odd that they added it and later removed it but I'm beginning to see why

Shit loads of dice, sources of flat damage, and the ability to find things within 5 miles of you that you can melt.

Ranger gets Hunter's Mark and Colossal Slayer which is +1d6+1d8, add in Favored Enemy and it's +2 damage against a certain subtype. One level deeper into ranger and this becomes +4 instead, but applies to two subtypes.

Add in the fact that you get combat superiority dice (which you'll be adding to ATK rather than DMG), you can go Sharpshooter for -5/+10.

On a turn when you surprise targets, your first hit gets automatic crits on 2d8+1d6+6d6+14+DEX. Meaning you're doing 4d8+14d6+14+DEX damage. Extra attacks get the flat, but not all the extra dice, so that becomes 2d8+14+DEX.

Add in Action Surge and use it to prepare an attack against the target at the beginning of its turn and you get to do that 2d8+7d6+14+DEX damage again. This works because the target hasn't acted yet and it's technically considered another turn. You could argue that they still have the surprised condition at the beginning of their turn, so it's an autocrit again.

Before your second turn, you've done at minimum 8d8+21d6+42+15 damage to the fucker.

anydice.com/program/c7a4

Average of 166.5 damage with a maximum of 247. Mind you, this is in the case when your DM does not let you crit a second time on the round the enemy is surprised.

anydice.com/program/c7a5

Average of 200.0 damage with a maximum of 305 in the case where your prepared attack counts as a crit (which it should still, right?)

Either way, at a minimum expense of resources and in total, only reducing your to-hit by -0.5 on average while still attacking at advantage, you're dishing out remarkable damage from range. Every resource spent is short rest to recover.

Also, a little caveat. If someone acts before your surprised target, you can prepare your attack to happen during that other person's turn to crit again without any fuzzy logic. Things only get weird when your target acts RIGHT AFTER YOU.

>On a turn when you surprise targets
which will never happen outside of a solo campaign because RAW if the bad guy notices the big clunky paladin who's along with you, you don't get surprise against them

Bards are easily the most versatile class overall

College of Whispers is a fucking trap though. Poison Damage at the cost of BI is so under powered. Especially if something doesn't look undead but is, you end up spending your juice on absolutely nothing.
Lore Bard seems to be the only one worth a damn, imo.

You can find targets within 5 miles. As the Ranger/Rogue, if you're not forward scouting, you're being a retard.

Ranger Revised (Hunter) 14/ Fighter (Champion 3)/Rogue (Assassin) 3
A surprise is insane in your hands.

>discussion of a game can only take place in the general thread
I hate 5e but this is stupid IMO.

Why champion if you're autocritting on surprises?
Also, why so deep into Ranger rather than Rogue? Fewer dice, real benefits (maybe multiattack)
Also, champion only adds 1/20 of your dice damage to your average DPR. For someone who only deals like 2d8+2d6, that's 16/20 extra DPR, even though you're critting twice as much.

>College of Satire
>haha what if we gave the Bard one of the rogue's main class features but made it better haha
Fucking WOTC.

Fightan Bard is okay, but Lore just outshines everything

College of Valor can't inspire itself, what's the point?

Barbarian/Battlemaster/Cleric

Turn one, cast Bless and enter Rage
Turn two, be a fucking beef and make your OP party just that little bit extra OP while you eat damage meant for them.
Then fucking heal it off like it wasn't even there.

In a party with a Rogue, or anything with once-per-turn extra dice, Commanding Strike or whatever to give them an extra attack outside of their turn is a must. If you've got two people who fit the bill, use the Shove maneuver with your other attack to give the other one another attack. People with more dice than you are worth more than you.