/5eg/ - Fifth Edition General

>Holy shit, that's a higher level of edginess than I've ever seen in a game.
not my finest moment

As a Cleric, can you hide your intentions from your own deity or do they always know what you're thinking? Can they be deceived into granting you power if you're a good enough actor?

Also, has anyone played as a Cleric with the Ambition domain? Is it any good?

Help with a custom item for my players. A magic warhammer than deals 1d4 cold damage per attack. My players are going to be level 4 and I want to give them their first magic weapon as they heard a rumor about treasure atop a mysterious tower. I designed the tower to be difficult because I was hoping they wouldn't go their first. Now I want their to be a downside for using this warhammer against undead. Should I make it heal undead on hit? Disadvantage when attacking undead? Wisdom saving throw to attack undead? My autism for balance is really something. If I give it a noticeable drawback should I make it deal 1d6 or more cold damage? I guess it's better to make the item weak initially and then maybe buff the item instead of too strong and have to nerf.

How good is Battlerager? let's assume a non dwarf restriction. It seems pretty cool even if 1d4 doesn't scale well.

I would say no because I feel like cleric spells and divine magic are more of a "how much faith do you have" thing.
But sure, why not? Ask your DM about how gods work in his setting or decide for yourself if you're DMing.

>As a Cleric, can you hide your intentions from your own deity or do they always know what you're thinking? Can they be deceived into granting you power if you're a good enough actor?
Ask your DM

Ambition domain?

tribality.com/2017/07/10/magic-the-gathering-plane-of-amonkhet-setting-for-dd-5e/

It's mostly just stuff from the Trickery and Light domains.

People should have at least 6 children with 3 reaching adulthood.

Depends on the setting. Clerics are not always assumed to gain their power directly from their god, and even when they do, it's often a one-time gift that is then the cleric's to do with as they will.
I would say that if all your spells come directly from your god, then you can't really "fool" them into giving you magic despite not believing in them/following their code. Gods aren't necessarily omniscient but they are pretty damn smart.

Can you rephrase your question in the form of "not attaching fetish pictures to an unrelated question"?

As a DM, I'd rule no. Angels know when they hear a lie so I'd rule that the gods would know when you were lying as well.

Bipolar rogue who sometimes saved babies and sometimes flayed werewolves alive.

Possibly.

I mean, you have no chance to hide your intention if deity decide to learn what you're up to, but if you're subtle enough, you might be willing to go under the radar, not drawing its attention to you.

That said: My interpretation is that said deity know you in depth and that's why it gives you spell - because you're in agreement. If it knows yoǘ're treacherous shit and still grants you spells, you might have a chance to do it.

Maybe just the cold damage doesn't work on undead? MAYBE even the magic of hammer doesn't work for overcoming undead's resistances, but i think that might be too much bookkeeping.

No I did not have an accent. Would that really have made it significantly worse given all the other shit I just listed?

What happens in your table if your players botch an attack?

How many encounter per day?

What rest rules do you use?

"Chaotic Neutral"?

>ǘ
I've never even seen this accent mark before.
Gods work in mysterious ways. The god may think you're "tricking" them now, but will come around eventually. Who knows? They might even be right.

I say go with 1d6 cold damage. 1d4 is kind of meh, especially if it has a drawback.
As for the drawback itself, create something that makes sense. Maybe tell your players that the cold damage is something that attacks the target's heart or soul, so undead are immune to it. You could also make it attack with disadvantage against undead, as if it goes against the will of the hammer itself.

Actually I began as Lawful Evil, then I swiched to Lawful/True Neutral. It was just one or two times that I crossed the line twice. I had a poor grasp of alignments.

3rd level ability is pretty decent because it's kind of like one of the abilities in the Polearm feat and Barbarians don't commonly get something to use their bonus action with. Plus since it's a melee weapon attack it still scales a bit with your rage bonus damage and Strength.The other ability isn't even worth mentioning though, as with most things that have to do with grappling in this system.

6th ability ain't bad either, since you take off 3-5 damage every time you use reckless attack.

10th ability feels like something that would be better as a level 6th, but then again will make your barbarian a lot faster combined with the +10 movement you get normally.

14th level ability is pretty much the Berserker's ability only worse in every single way except you don't have to roll to deal the pitiful damage at least.

I might be missing something since I'm using 5etools instead of a handbook, but did 5e do away with carrying capacity?

Is there any reason for my caster to worry about strength at all, or can I dump it completely?

>Botch
THIS IS NOT A FUCKING THING IN 5E, STOP THIS SHIT RIGHT NOW, REEEEEEEEEEEEEE

The Druid and Battlemaster in my game discovered that if the druid casts hold person on an enemy, the Battlemaster can auto-crit him 4 times by spending his action surge and burn all 4 superiority dice to shit out 16d6+8d8+16 damage in a single turn. They're only level 5. What sort of monsters have I created?

>but did 5e do away with carrying capacity?
No, it did not. Your carrying capacity is your strength times 15.

Does anyone have that table with the weapon stats from when they were beta testing 5e?

Thanks, pal.

Is there a reason not to dump int if it's not my casting stat and my character isn't particularly intelligent?

Only if you're about to enter a mind flayer heavy campaign.

have more than one monster per combat and this tactic falls apart.

>playing D&D 5th edition
Why would you even want to play one of the dullest tabletop role-playing games in the history of tabletop roleplaying games? Seriously, class you play in this game to fight assorted villains, is indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the shitty art and unsubtle political support of transsexuals, the classes’ only consistency is having the exact same bonus to hit, and the goal of which being damage, to make even the least combat-oriented games all about combat..

Perhaps the die was cast when Merals decided to make the game appeal to all of D&D's fractured fanbases; he made sure the game would never be taken seriously as anything but a bland middle ground, just a simple inoffensive game that doesnt nothing new. 5th edition might be anti-complexity (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-progress in its embracing of D&D's most archaic rules, and the discarding of 4e's progress. No one wants to face that fact. Now they no longer have to.

>a-at least it's pretty good, though!
No! The character options are all but non-existent. As I read the core rulebook, I noticed that every class had some mechanic that used advantage. I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that advantage showed up again. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Mearls' mind is so governed by the few ideas he has (like advantage), that he has no other recourse for creating class abilities. Later I read a lavish, loving review of 5th edition by the creator of Dungeon World. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are playing D&D 5e at 15 or 16 years of age, then when they get older they will go on to play Dungeon World." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you play D&D 5e you are, in fact, being trained to play Dungeon World.

Int saving throws should be a bit less rare. I know there are a handful of spells that deal psychic damage but require a wisdom save. I can't remember if the Astral plane or the ethereal plane requires int saves as well for psychic winds.

no one respond to the copy pasta, it's just virt sperging again.

Try outnumbering them. Massively.

>What happens in your table if your players botch an attack?
They miss.

Amateur

Are there prestige classes in 5e?

Not really - archetypes are the way to subtly tweak what your class offers,

So I'm playing a necromancers apprentice in a world where necromancy is not inherently evil. My dm has asked me to come up with a list of objectives I'm supposed to accomplish on my quest in order to become a necromancy journeyman. Stuff along the lines of helping a disgruntled spirit pass to the other side and the like. Any suggestions?

There is one, in an Unearthed Arcana. Both Veeky Forums and reddit absolutely hated the idea, so WoTC decided not to implement it further.

autopsies, digging holes, burying bodies, mummification/corpse preservation

Why didn't people like it?

have them run into the bizzaro versions of themselves, and have the enemy caster hold person the druid if he wins initiative

not like they're doing anything wrong, but just for laughs

because prestige classing sucks, and the Rune Scribe could have been an interesting class/archetype.

Attend to the very dying to make sure they're able to communicate last wishes to their kin and lawyers and shit. Ghost Estate Lawyer is a pretty neat idea for a low level necromancer generally. Hell even finding out which religion's death/burial rites the deceased wanted would be good.

Forensics maybe? Goes with the autopsy thing. Maybe postmortem investigation options. Maybe you could go the PoE route and help with afflictions of the soul.

Yuan-Ti used to get the experience modifier but I guess that they just decided to skip detrimental features in 5e

Prestige classes are a silly idea that only made sense in 3.5, where base classes were bland and uninteresting. You could also divide them pretty neatly into gimmicky and overspecialized (like Knight of the Flying Hunt, for example) and overpowered and a clear upgrade over a base class, like Urpriest, Bone Knight or Ruby Knight Vindicator.
Archetypes are much better, and we already have them.

Thanks for the advice. The Warhammer Algor Mortis is based off the process of death where the body starts to become cold. It wouldn't make sense that something already dead to be afflicted by this type of magic.

You don't have leitmotifs for specific people and places?

it is just an automatic miss?

4rry please go back to your containment thread or make one for yourself. Your game failed and ours succeeded; deal with it.

They don't get to hit.

I used to memey 1s, but those are shitty to everyone that isn't the DM, so I quit.

Correct.

In 5e, 1s are autmisses on attack rolls ONLY, and 20s are autohits on attack rolls ONLY.

There are no crits on skill checks, and the only saving throws that allow crits are death saving throws.

IF I were to do anything special on a Nat 1, I'd make them roll to confirm anyway.

Oh look, it's the bait pasta from last thread.

Did you play Telltale Batman? Zsasz appears in it. It's a very cool scene.
youtube.com/watch?v=BjBITnZad_8

does multiclassing monk with druid work at all? I'm mostly in it for the shapeshifting for a sun wukong style character.

Pretty sure you can only use one superiority die per turn

pretty sure you should read the book before spouting nonsense.

Do you ever actually get much of an opportunity to utilize stealth?

I'm trying to decide between Guild Merchant and Criminal for a Cleric I'm making and I don't know whether I value Insight/Persuasion more than Stealth/Deception or not.

Pretty sure it says once per *attack*.So if you have two attacks, two superiority dice. Four attacks, four superiority dice. You just cannot stack them on the same attack.

in a combat encounter how much and when players can talk?

Talk to your DM. Seriously. This is the backbone of these questions.

They can largely talk all they want. Simple ideas are treated as free actions. If they start meta-ing a ton, or if it gets ridiculous, remember rounds are 6 seconds long.

Unarmored Defense works, Unarmed mostly does not due to natural weapons though I'd rule in favor of anything but damage modification. Flurry afaik does work RAW.

We had this one a few threads ago, at least in relation to "can I use my Wisdom to AC while I am a bear?". Eloquent answers and rabid trollery on both sides of the argument, but the real answer is "ask your GM".

In terms of just getting the thing to work effectively in play, remember with all these hybrid characters that you can only contribute in one way at a time. Choose whether you want your primary method for contributing to combat to be punching people or casting spells, and put most of your levels into the class that is good at that. (Also, remember the Shillellellargh Druid cantrip, so hitting people with a magic staff is something both are equally good at but in different ways.)

I never actually played it, but I once had a character concept for a really edgy dragonborn Warlock. One I've ACTUALLY played though would probably be my tiefling paladin of asmodeus. It was so bad, my DM had to ban evil alignments.

Unarmored defense does not work with natural armored creature. Natural weapons do not work with unarmed strikes. They would also not qualify as monk weapons.

Anything to do with this is pure DM-fiat. RAW does not support this. Personally, I think it would be cool if you let the dude shapeshift into an ape and let him use some of the monk features - it would fit the character concept well, and as long as its not trying to be a pure min/max thing I wouldn't care.

But that's DM fiat.

COMBAT SUPERIORITY
When you choose this archetype at 3rd leveI, you
learn maneuvers that are fueled by special dice called
superiority dice.
Maneuvers. Vou learn three maneuvers of your
choice, which are detailed under "Maneuvers" below.
Many maneuvers enhance an atlack in some way. Vou
can use only one maneuver per attack.

In all its janky OCR glory. Technically, it doesn't say you can't use the same maneuver repeatedly on an attack. As ever, ask your GM if you're lucky enough to have one. Also, hug your GM if you're lucky enough to have one. Ignore the smell, they work hard to make you happy.

Right, natural armor = armor. I didn't clarify but most beasts types don't have it anyway. I suppose Elementals don't have natural weapons either, hmm. I'm sure you could go find SOME beast that would fit it perfectly. Monkeys would seem the type (if you can have ever seen them)

>You can use only one maneuver per attack
>But you're trying to twist that to mean you can only use one maneuver as many times as you WANT per attack.

That's ... Actually kind of fucking stupid. If I ever heard someone try to argue that, I would just stare at them deadpan until they realized how stupid that argument is. If you use the same maneuver twice, you're still using two maneuvers on the attack.

I was mistaken, Elementals DO have only melee weapon attacks.

I've been playing in a game where my best friend is the DM but his fiance is a player. Her character keeps flirting with my character and lately I've been fantasizing about getting my dick sucked by my best friends woman. I'm a horrible person, but I want to see if this goes anywhere.

>But you're trying to twist that to mean you can only use one maneuver as many times as you WANT per attack.
Oh, I'm not trying to twist it in that direction. I think the intention is pretty clear, and I also don't think there are many situations where you would want to burn all your dice on one attack. Fighters having versatility and the ability to exploit emerging opportunities is a wonderful thing, and players who want to chuck that in exchange for more raw damage are free to play Champions. I'm just observing the potential for an argument to be made.

I too would not allow players to do that were I to GM.

What is important to remember for a monk/druid multiclass, is as long as the creature is making a normal *ATTACK* and not a *MULTIATTACK*, you can trigger your extra attack off of the animal.

Technically, you should be able to also use your martial arts die in lieu of using the creatures normal attacks and make 'unarmed attacks', but you may lose out on special features that the creature has. On the plus side, you could roll as a super frail but wise monk who shapeshifts in order to make use of the creatures STR/DEX/Health. This is all DM-Fiat, but I would be fine letting a monk use his Unarmored AC calculation *as long as they aren't stacking calculations*. So they can do Natural Armor, or they can make it 10+DEX+WIS. Not (Natural Armor)+DEX+WIS. So you can have a feeble monk, who gets much less feeble when he wild shapes into something. The problem you will have is unless you continue the DM-Fiat train, you're largely not looking at humanoid wildshapes. Most of them are pretty blatantly four legged wild beasts - unless your DM allows you to do something like upgrade your 'Ape' form.

Fuck off.

Cuck your best friend if he TPKs you, he'll understand

...

I think the Ape form (super low) is one of the only promising ones because it actually does explicitly have hands to hold a monk weapon. I'm sure you could whip up some kind of Dire Ape but it seems pretty tough to get any benefits RAW.

The fact that all shields are mechanically the same is really fucking lame.

>all ______ are mechanically the same
welcome to 5e

That always bothered me, we need a bunch of balanced homebrew magic shields, I haven't found many good ones.

I just leave it up to flavor.

...

There ARE magic shields, user probably wants small/medium/heavy/tower shields and so forth.

Really everything about armor in D&D is terrible, the shields are just a particularly egregious offender. A buckler and a pavise are the same thing mechanically? It's nonsense

Huh, that's neat.

I might have to use some of those.

Death domain dwarf cleric who was a Vecna fanboy. His warhammer had his brothers skull affixed to the backside of it. I convinced my party my healing magic was contingent on developing g a connection with them, and for it to work they would have to sacrifice pieces of themselves. By the end of our three sessions, I had collected an ear, three fingers, a toe, a tooth, and almost convinced one of the players to give me an eye to revive his brother.

Played him with a very heavy and caricatured russian accent. Shit was cash.

Is yuan-ti actually that strong, I talked with my friend and we more or less came to the conclusion that it was about as strong as half elf. What does 5eg think?

Only played the first episode, and did not really like it very much. But that was an interesting scene.

Yuan-ti get a free cantrip (fine) and a free spell on certain targets (fine), darkvision (like fucking everything else), immunity to poison and poison damage (better dwarf feature), 3 languages (common, abyssal, draconic), and ADVANTAGE ON ALL MAGICAL SAVING THROWS.

THAT IS FUCKING BROKEN.

Are you fucking retarded? Even Suggestion once a day pales with their magic resistance to EVERYTHING. Not just illusions, like gnomes, EVERYTHING. Shit is nuts.

I like it, but I feel like tower shields should impose some sort of disadvantage in melee combat while being exceptionally good against missiles. Pavises and scutums were shields for blocking missiles and fighting in formations, not single combat.

They are better at being dwarves than dwarves, and better at being gnomes than gnomes. That shit is fucked.

Some of these are pretty cool, but the buckler and targe always bothered me.
The buckler is silly because it implies you DON'T use other shield to actively defend yourself. You do. That's where the normal +2 comes from. The only difference is that a buckler isn't strapped.
The targe makes no sense. Show me one example of a historic shield that required no grip and I'll withdraw this claim.