Welcome to the D&D 5th Ed. General Discussion Thread
>Xanathar's Guide Table of Contents
web.archive.org
>Forge Cleric - Xanathar's Guide
media.wizards.com
>Unearthed Arcana: Fiendish Options
media.wizards.com
>Trove
rpg.rem.uz
>5etools
astranauta.github.io
>Resources
pastebin.com
Previously, on /5eg/...
We did it lads.
Crawford's argument here seems to be that because adamantine armor doesn't appear under the stock adventuring / armor items pages in the PHB that it must be magically enchanted somehow, because it is now in the "magic items" section. The description mentions no enchantment, instead talking about a kind of metal, which is also not stated to be magical. It is a perfectly reasonable assumption that the armor is entirely non-magical and would not be suppressed by an AMF.
And if it IS magical because Crawford is a literal-to-the-point-of-insanity clownstick and the section of a book supercedes all description of items, long-standing materials, and common sense, it should stand to reason that punching someone while wearing MAGICAL ARMOR (which includes gauntlets) would be a MAGICAL attack. Or maybe it doesn't, because again, we've abandoned all common sense.
Fucking randos on Twitter understand basic logic better than our "rules master".
Saved you a click.
Thanks man, been waiting for this for months now.
>NO OP QUESTION
alright, what are some mechanics that you introduce for boss fights /5eg/?
I've used a mechanic where a 3x3 or 4x4 space is highlighted on a previous turn and the monster slams the ground as a free action on his turn, giving the PC's time to scatter and utilize different y-axis of play.
I was with you on your first paragraph but how the fuck does wearing magic armor make all your attacks magical?
If I stab a creature with a magical sword, do I bypass its resistance to nonmagical attacks?
Now what happens if I punch a creature with a gauntlet that belongs to a magical suit of armor? We're not talking about you putting on a breastplate and then kneeing a guy with your bare flesh, but something like a man in MAGICAL FULL PLATE using actual parts of the MAGICAL ARMOR to contact the enemy as part of his unarmed attacks.
I kinda like that - FFXIV-esque. You see an enemy target someone at a location so you scram.
I like targeting specific parts of enemies - I'll give certain (usually boss-type enemies) resistances or defenses on their core until armor/scales/body parts have their (separate) hp pools depleted, with options for targeting.
>user casts quickened spell: illusory script
So you're confused that the 1st item listed under the Magic Items section might not be a magic item?
I've taken to giving the bosses a "tell" at the end of their turn for which attack they use next.
If its a multi-attack which deals chip damage to a group of PC's then there is almost no tell. But if its a large AOE or single-target-slam attack then I give a tell such as:
>The ogre grabs a handfull of goblin corpses and raises them above his head facing 'pc #2'
>Or I play a subtle audio tell such as a chain dragging along the ground to signal a slam attack next turn (the players love audio tells because they're rewarded for paying attention out of their turn)
Nice, I'll probably use this for my next monster-of-the-week.
Magic is infused in things with purpose - weapons generally to attack, armor generally to protect. Some magic armor explicitly tells you you can attack with it - in those cases the ruling is obvious. Otherwise your fists do not bypass resistances to non-magic just because you have an adamantine glove on.
DMs of /5eg/, how do you handle hiding during combat?
I have a stealth-rules doc.
Lemme see if I can find it.
If it isn't designed to do magical damage then there's no reason to believe that the damage dealt with it is magical for the purposes of overcoming resistances. It's like how Conjure Animals doesn't count the beasts' attacks as magical attacks.
Nice try, but no.
>armor made out of a super-hard alloy that is historically not magical and is not explicitly stated to be magical even now, seemingly owing its "magical property" of crit negation to its being made of said super-hard alloy
Per you, this other fucker, and Crawford's absurdly literal interpretations, the "totally magical adamantine armor" should absolutely bypass nonmagical resistance, as it's listed in creature entries as
>from nonmagical attacks
not
>from nonmagical weapons
How the fuck are you this retarded? How is it actually possible, what the goddamn fuck.
Conjure Animals doesn't make a magical construct, it teleports faeries that look like other shit. Summoning a broom to your side doesn't make it magical.
Post Xanathar's Arcane Archer.
>Per you, this other fucker, and Crawford's absurdly literal interpretations, the "totally magical adamantine armor" should absolutely bypass nonmagical resistance, as it's listed in creature entries as
>>from nonmagical attacks
>not
>>from nonmagical weapons
Presumably because the second wording means that spells (say, magic missile) do not overcome magical resistances, which would be a tad odd.
>not explicitly stated to be magical
It's an item under the Magic Items section.
It's explicitly stated that the item's description describes its magical properties
It's literally the first item under it.
Read the damn book, user.
>make a suit of armor
>good job
>reinforce it with adamantine
>WOAH IT'S MAGIC NOW BUDDY
Do we think the price of ink to print "from nonmagical weapon attacks" would have broken WotC's budget? actually yeah probably, the team is paid in Subway gift cards
what if only the chest plate is adamantine and the gloves aren't?
Adamantine armor is not just some armor made of adamantine, it's also been magically reinforced. Otherwise it wouldn't be a magic weapon.
>Boss fights
...
So How is tenser's transformation looking?
Then it wouldn't work, and why did you waste the party's adamantine item reward on a breastplate?
>Then it wouldn't work
Why wouldn't it?
Because you're not punching someone with the magical magic adamantine gloves, you're just punching with regular gloves. Try punching them while wearing Gloves of Missile Snaring instead.
>Do we think the price of ink to print "from nonmagical weapon attacks" would have broken WotC's budget?
I can think of several sentences in the books that could use a rewording, so I don't disagree with the rules being very vague on certain points. Yours does also put into question whether unarmed strikes bypasses the resistance, as that is also not a weapon attack.
Rules are hard to make. It usually takes more than a century to get anywhere close to being part of a legal team actually writing rules that will affect an country, just because of how important the wording is, and how easy it is to mess it up.
Right, and mithril armor has been magically quieted, too. No one can make armor out of these materials without enchanting them, and no one can enchant armor to do the same thing without using said materials. That makes total sense.
>Yours does also put into question whether unarmed strikes bypasses the resistance, as that is also not a weapon attack.
Not him, but unarmed strikes ARE melee weapon attacks.
The armor doesn't make your attacks magical, you fucking retard.
Ok now post the rest of it
I had a maze of transparent walls making 10 ft. height and width corridors. The adventurers could see through the walls, but not the walls themselves as it had the same index of refraction as air, thus completely transparent. The adventurers were there for a mcguffin, a mcguffin was floating in one of the gelatinous cubes, but there were replicas in every other gelatinous cubes in the room. (there were 16 gelatinous cubes total in the maze-room).
The gelatinous cubes used tremorsense to sense the party through the glass walls, but only knew how to move in a straight line towards the nearest adventurer, so would mindlessly be stuck behind transparent walls. This led to adventurers being panicked by gelatinous cubes that seemed to be swarming the party but couldn't all actually reach them. Alternatively, the adventurer's could watch the cube's movement to better map the maze.
As all DMs know, Gelatinous Cubes have a fun "engulf" ability, creating scenarios where an adventurer would get sucked up into a cube, then carried along one of the mazes corridors. Meanwhile, the adventurers were trying to map their way around by drawing marks along the walls, which was effective until a gelatinous cubes would squeegee it off.
Either by hammering on the transparent walls repeatedly or by laying hands on the actual mcguffin, a sentient King Cube would awaken and move out of a large central floor block, and telepathically command the rest of the cubes to converge on the adventurers, as the cubes could now navigate the maze.
The players handled the whole thing with, uh, determination, even as they got split up in the maze not realizing they were on opposite sides of a wall and were being sandwiched in corridors from Gelatinous Cubes on each side. They had a fun time, and I'm very proud of them.
This early on the thread and we got ourselves a view inside the mind of the people that complain about Crawford's explanations
Could someone take a stab at answering a question I've had for a while: Warlock with Voice of the Chain Master in a Fog Cloud with a familiar with 60ft blindsight. Is the Warlock blinded by the heavy obscurement or not due to having extra senses? Do I EB with disadvantage? Outside the 60ft? I really have no idea how this interaction works.
I am 99% sure it was confirmed not to be. My morning drowsiness could be making me confused though. I'll check sage advice.
Can you post the Hexblade? Trying to roll one tonight.
Why shouldn't it, if you're striking with a piece of the magical armor?
Seeing as we're on to goofy unarmed strike weapon errata, here's what Crawford has to say about that
>In D&D, a weapon is an object. A weapon attack is a process. Sometimes the rules let you use nonweapons to engage in that process.
So we can attack with nonweapons as a process. An attack using a MAGICAL nonweapon is... not magical, you say?
...
Nevermind, I was wrong.
Carry on.
I can't find my doc but I'll borrow this summation and add my image to supplement it.
>Stealth: Hiding Rules, pg 177; Hide action, pg 192; PH errata, "it's not about whether you are seen, it's about whether you are seen clearly."; that would mean that the Wood Elf racial does nothing, except Sage Advice has that racial work in the relevant circumstances, even when it does not grant Lightly Obscured by the meaning in the vision rules.
>Hide, they see you, then you have to use the Hide action to re-gain hidden condition, which is an in-combat action (that can, therefore, be used in combat).
It teleports inherently magical fey spirits to you. They still don't do magical attacks, just like a Hasted Fighter isn't automatically doling out magical punches and a smack with a Wizard's spellbook wouldn't count as a magical attack. Just because something is magic doesn't mean that magic dealt with it is magical damage.
thank you based user. My party of idiots will thouroughly enjoy it.
We got the new invocations yet?
Why the fuck did you think unarmed strikes weren't melee attacks?
You are needlessly autistic. What piece of the armor are you striking with? Gauntlets are typically taken up by their own slot as are boots.
What would the ferryman of the Styx like as a puzzle to present to adventurers? What would he like as a non-standard bribe?
What if the ferryman isnot!Japanese and the river Styx is Sanzu. Asking for Wuxia
>frogposts
It would be like if you were blindfolded and a friend was telling you where to throw a dart. You still have Disad, but you would know the direction to aim so you aren't completely in the dark
user, you forgot to answer this (you)
There's nothing inherently magical about fey but for them being faggots from another plane, spellbooks aren't magical, and a transmutation spell affecting the muscles of a creature doesn't mean his skin is radiating magic juice now.
However, this fucking suit of armor which can only supposedly be magical thanks to the enchantment that must be placed on all reinforced adamantine suits and does a "magic" thing to blows that strike its physical surface is totally not magic when you use its physical surface to strike something else?
Where in any book does it say that there is specific "weapon-enhancing attack enchantments" and "armor-enhancing defense enchantments" and only the former works for breaking nonmagical resists? Because these semantics and "read the book" can swing both ways.
Like so:
READ THE BOOK
Oh, I thought you were saying the armor wouldn't deflect crits unless the cloves were adamantine too, thanks.
Magic armor is not a magic weapon.
A magic weapon is not magic armor.
These are technical terms within the game, and the fluff of "attack/defense" enchantments that anyone is referencing is just an extra-canonical rationalization for the differentiation between those technical terms.
Jesus.
A number of them. Don't know if we got all.
>Where in any book does it say that there is specific "weapon-enhancing attack enchantments" and "armor-enhancing defense enchantments"
A +1 shield doesn't have +1 on attack/damage rolls. A +1 weapon doesn't give +1 AC
>Fey are magical creatures closely tied to the forces of nature.
>Fey are magical creatures
MM pg 6. Specifically mentioned are Satyrs, which have a melee attack called Ram which does not deal magical damage.
But dude, unarmed attacks aren't punches, they are just body strikes. If I've got Adamantine Breastplate you can fucking bet I'm going to chestbump people in the face.
Depends on the DM. Some let me hide behind a random wall in combat while others don't because the enemy saw me go behind it. In my opinion hiding should work unless you try to hide behind the same barrel several times.
Magic attacks do not specify needing a +1 Attack/Damage, see: AA, ki fists, etc., so there's no reason a +1 Shield should add to ab/dam. It should absolutely bypass nonmagical resistances if used to shield bash someone.
That would work.
Unarmed attacks are made without weapons though, it sounds like you're improvising one.
Do you understand what it means by the gauntlets and boots are typically replaced by their own slot? How about you actually read the fucking book before your retardation reaches even further critical levels.
Notice how the weapons don't inherently grant AC or how the armors don't inherently enable a weapon attack, you fucking retard.
finally i can get my dick wet and play D&D
The biggest thing I hate about Samurai, is that every class so far usually explains a ROLE, not a position.
"Samurai" Should have just been some kind or refined fighter, something like "Duelist" or "Savant", to have a smug, slightly chatty fighter who focuses on the right moments to strike, and then have a subnote that "A savant fighter would be a good fit for your knightly duelists who aren't quite paladins or swashbucklers, or Samurai who aren't quite barbarians or battlemasters."
>fey are magical creatures
According to Crawford's logic, that means satyrs (and all other fey) disappear if you subject them to an anti-magic field, and they can slaughtered instantly with Dispel Magic.
Use your newfound power responsibly, Anons.
Anons? Quick question; do you think I can use 4e's fluff for minotaurs in a non-PoLand setting?
To quickly summarize:
* Baphomet makes Minotaurs to help him fight Melora.
* Baphomet loses and abandons them.
* Erathis & Moradin adopt them and teach them civilization.
* Minotaurs make great civilization.
* Baphomet becomes a demon and corrupts most of them.
* Melora and Kord destroy the minotaur empire.
* Scattered clans either embrace Baphomet's corruption or turn to Erathis, Moradin, Bahamut and Pelor to fight against it and seek to rebuild what they had.
The body strikes are specifically part of the monk's attack routines.
Do we have any of the following yet?
>Storm Herald Barbarian
>Grave Cleric
>Monster Slayer Ranger
Now you're just being willfully retarded.
You know he doesn't rule that. It's why dragons are "magical" in essence but them being magical doesn't mean their breath weapons count as magic.
So. /5eg/'s stance on homebrew/3pp shit is that it's useless imbalanced shit, but anybody got the newest Deep Magic pdf from KP?
Help a poorfag out?
Use Dlance minotaurs - they're fun.
I do kind of like that they left it open-ended for an arcane archer to be using either more wizardly or more druid-based magic in terms of their arrows with the options of cantrip and skill. Kinda sucks that they don't get magic arrows forever at level 3 anymore, but I can see why they wanted to push it back.
>Do you understand what it means by the gauntlets and boots are typically replaced by their own slot?
"It" doesn't say that, you do. The book doesn't mention slots. And if you can't keep up with the rest of the discussion, just stop posting.
I think we have GC
Some homebrew is good. Most of it is very very very bad because people are really fucking bad with mechanical balance and have poor understanding of the game in general, and yet make homebrew anyway.
Do you even read what you write or just bang your head on the keyboard anyway?
That's not what's written on the spell, so I guess Crawford would rule it differently.
Maybe you should... read the book?
There actually aren't slots in 5e. Whatever you can justify to your DM and that doesn't go over your attunement is what you can wear.
I want to play a barbarian who wears 4 magical hats all stacked on top of one another.
>Why the fuck did you think unarmed strikes weren't melee attacks?
It was confirmed to be melee attacks in a Sage Advice, so clearly this was actually something people weren't sure about.
Dispel Magic can target a creature, and if all Fey are magical beings, they are clearly not alive (because magic cannot be living) and thus animated by False Life, "a necromantic facisimilie of life", which is a first level spell that Dispel Magic would end. QED.
...
All this trouble because Crawford's a retard that put it on the weapon list, then yanked it off when other retards started whining that "how could 'unarmed' be a weapon". Instead of telling them that it's just a fucking list of common shit that does damage and not some strict categorization, we go through this whole errata song and dance.
Confirmed to be weapon attacks, because on the PHB they were always under Melee Attacks.
Not questioning if they are melee attacks, but if they are WEAPON attacks.
Yeah yeah, I know the whole
>If I put my hands in my pockets, I am concealing weapons xd
Meme, but logically, your hands aren't weapons, monk or otherwise.
They are for rule purposes though, so that is all that matters. I had just forgotten what the ruling was.
Does 5E even have rules about wearing multiple magical rings on the same hand?
If I had 21 attunement slots, could I wear 21 magic rings?
...
Page 140 of the DMG, you autistic retard. They don't have to spell out they're slots because they don't assume people are so utterly retarded and autistic.
If you can't actually form coherent reasons and continue to indulge in retardation, don't bother in continuing.
Wait, twenty plus ONE?
When totally obscured, creature can take the Hide action. Totally obscured means whenever an creature does not have line of sight upon you(the creature attempting to hide)- either you are behind something opaque, are in darkness, the observing creature is blind or otherwise unable to see, or you are invisible.
The Hide action requires a stealth roll contested by a perception check. Winning the contest, the hiding creature gains the benefits of being hidden.
Since you have advantage on an attack whenever you are unseen anyway, the only real impact Hiding has is you can move from totally obscured by something physical, such as a wall, to being only lightly obscured, and still be unseen from behind half-cover from the corner of the wall, which is treated like being lightly obscured.
My table is quite familiar with how I handle things so stuff moves quickly. (there's always one person playing a Rogue).
Are the (You)s really worth looking like such an idiot? Is it really that fun to make people pity you?
>he doesn't wear rings on his dick
Three item attunement though. You can still wear them but can only benefit from 3.
>Does 5E even have rules about wearing multiple magical rings on the same hand?
Nope.
>level 3: when you fire a magical arrow
>level 7: you can finally make magical arrows to fire
hurf durf WotC should burn for its laziness
Bless your heart, user, but that page says items must be worn on the appropriate appendages, not that they are all mutually exclusive. Do you think you need to take your shirt off to don a breastplate, since they both take up "the chest slot"? Don't be ridiculous.