/5eg/ - Fifth Edition General

Please, read the whole chain before posting.

Got someone who wants to make their Bard character a historian, raconteur and orator who has no instrument but instead channels their magic through their voice and the phrases and quotes that he uses to inspire the party members (and provoke/distract enemies).

As DM I'm all for it but are there any potential diegetic or gameplay reasons it shouldn't work? The only problem I can see is that his spellcasting focus can't be taken away from him as easily as other bards, which I'm comfortable with.

Pic related. Character is inspired in certain respects by Tolstoy.

>implying a wizard has his spellbook out all the time

Your argument would make more sense if it was an arcane focus. If so, then yeah, I'd apply it as such.

Wizard is having to comprehend the source code of the universe. Also, you could have his attack roll spells miss and hit unintended targets if so desired. as in lets say his buddy is in the line of fire next to the guy you are trying to hit.

That doesn't mean do it every time, because it would get old fast, but just to spice things up.

What is there to the roleplayed description if there is not an impact upon the world at large?

That's what 5% is, that few instances of mortal humanlike error, or the world at large. shit just happens sometimes.

Hyperbole can be used for a point, but I am not relying on it, I am trying to communicate that critfails are not the popular meme of "I stab myself" all the time.

You could argue that roleplaying descriptions add nothing to the fight with that last point in mind, but it seems a lot more interesting than "You miss. Bob it's your turn now"

Buddy, let me tell you, I have run several games with loads of martial characters, and that 64% chance seems unlikely as you make it out. Anecdotal? Yes. As bad as you make it out to be? No.

Sanest person here

Bottom line: think of inconveniences as a spice to a natural 1, not the flour that is the base to it.

As in if there's a tense climatic scene, you could have the ones mean the swords lock between your fighter and the BBEG, and rule it that the BBEG is locked too, but he seems to have a slightly more better position, as he bears over you with his weight on the blade.

Honestly, you could also have the 1 be somewhat to the player's benefit, as in if he overshoots the axe throw, it could accidentally hit the door past the target and close it, which could be good if you're trying to box in a weaselly fucker in the room your after

Sounds like you need a couple of eye beams.

I've always like druids, because they are made from natural ingredients. And I believe everyone should have a healthy diet.

wtb more quotes, lets just rip out some of these pages and replace them with quips from xanathar

But then if they roll a 1 on the Arcana check...
I can't wait to think of all the crazy implications that one has.

Didn't know that they nerfed monster slayer ranger to shit. Sad to see it go really.

>punish the wizards party for the wizard getting a critical fail
hey nice try bud but your wizard hat is showing in this post

>Collaborative 4-man strawman
Math is a strawman.
>Implying every nat 1 has to do something detrimental
Well that's the point of critical fumbles isn't it? That something detrimental happens when you roll a nat1?
>The difference is not huge, but your mistake is terrible.
You're right. I was going to commit seppuku but I kept dropping my sword. Please forgive me.

If you don't care about the focus think, i can't see anything wrong with it. On the contrary, it makes more sense to me than faggy singing when you should be stabbing the guy before you.

Also, Tolstoy rocks, i would love to see how it plays.