/5eg/ - Fifth Edition General

So I asked in last thread before I realized a new one was already made, but:

How the fuck did they manage to make Arcane Archer completely shit? I guess I gotta think of something else to do for my next character, then.

Ideal Gish class:
Wizard base
Instead of extra attack or school benefits, can exchange spell slots as a bonus action for superiority dice that don't replenish. The dice are d6s.

Learns 2 maneuvers every subclass feature from a special mage maneuvers list that aid him on things like martial utility and concentration checks.

The class doesn't start with superiority die. All dice must be gained from spell slot exchange.

>Play an EK
>Use Archery
Bam, better Arcane Archer.

Good.

Now kill yourself.

Better:
>Balance is somewhat fixed between martials and casters (not entirely)
>There's nothing that straight up breaks the game if you run it RAW
>Character building is a hell of a lot simpler, so it's much more welcoming to new players
>The skill system isn't stupid

Worse:
>Character building is a hell of a lot simpler, so it's a hell of a lot less fun
>Slow release schedule has left it starved for meaningful build choices and options

That might be a decent idea.

The problem with that is stuff like green flame blade doesn't work with ranged.

Well, things are pared down considerably, and you no longer have stupid shit like separate skills for Listen and Spot, or ten thousand different Rogue skills. Truthfully, there's not a lot that's explicitly worse-combat is a bit dull for certain archetypes, and there aren't as many options (though considering 3.x's bloat, that's a blessing to many)-however, it does seem like it's perpetuating a few bad habits from earlier editions. The latest book garnered some criticism for nerfing a couple martial archetypes, and catering heavily to wizards, for example.

So 5e has Paladins both not tied to alignment and not tied to gods, which is one of the most egregious examples of inflexible alignment i can think of from 3.x if that gives you an idea of how that problem was fixed. For better or worse, caster supremacy can at least be argued about rather than established as a fact. Concentration is a good balancing mechanic but it entirely kills the ability to just buff yourself into invincibility. Overall I'd say 5e's biggest flaw over 3.x is it takes away a good chunk of flexibility and customization from players, and gives maybe about half that power to the DM and chucks the rest.

Oh boy.
Better:
>Spellcasters and martials are not entirely on the same level, but at least concentration mechanic brings wizards down to being mortals
>Bounded accuracy means that high level play is not about fighting supersonic spellcasting dragons anymore
>No dead levels
>Little to no bad and useless archetypes, classes

And most importantly
>You no longer need a week of reading obscure books and online guides to make a fighter with a shield, who's not useless

Cons:
>Release pace is slower than a glacier
>Design team still has no idea what the fuck they are doing, which results in things like Loremaster Wizard. Thank God for playtesting.

Well, I'm not edition professional but I've played both so I can try.

There isn't a ridiculous amount of skills anymore so when you hand a character sheet for the first time to a new player they don't gasp and widen their eyes. Some things are merged so it isn't fucking dumb anymore, like hiding and move silently being two separate skills. A downside of this is there is a lot less variety in skill choices.

Alignments are more like guidelines and there's not that many limitations like in 3.5. If I remember correctly, some classes had alignment restrictions like needing to be lawful to be a paladin, those are gone. The limitations that remain are mostly linked to magic items, like good aligned characters can only use items of good and vice versa. I don't think there's a downside, I'd say its objectively better.

Magic items aren't nearly as common. Some magic items need attunement, so you need to bind them to you and you can only do a few. Can be an upside/downside depending on how you view magic items.

Classes are for the most part much more well balanced, not many trap options, at least not as much as 3.5e.

>Fighter base
>can exchange martial dice as a bonus action for spell slots that don't replenish.
>Learns 2 spells every subclass feature from a special fighter spell list that aid him on out of combat utility, up to 9th level.
>The class doesn't start with spell slots. All spell slots must be gained from martial dice exchange.

Ah yes, loremaster wizard. Or "We hate sorcerers so much that we decided to make a wizard subclass full of features clearly built for sorcerers"

I've been trying. I have downed two full bottles of baby aspirin with no other results than my knees don't hurt anymore.

Allow me to post 2 pictures for you
1 of 2.

Kill yourself.

>Overall I'd say 5e's biggest flaw over 3.x is it takes away a good chunk of flexibility and customization from players, and gives maybe about half that power to the DM and chucks the rest.
Id argue this is a strength. It gives the GM thebpowrr to say "No, fuck you" to the unironic "wizard mains" who is the cancer killing the hobby.

Well, that's something to be happy about, isn't it?

2 of 2

Why have you put fighters above the bar and wizards on it?

That suggests that fighters are better than wizards, and that's not really true

I'm fine with this idea conceptually (and I love the idea of martials getting martial die generally), but in practice I think exchanging short rest resources for long rest resources is going to make it unattractive for most players while the same is not true for the reverse, give how rarely most players take a short rest.

Given Skywrite is a 2nd level ritual, wouldn't larger town's skies be thick with advertising?

They're not "above" the bar. They're a different axis. All martial power, no magical.

>Casterfags in a nutshell

I like juiblex, but that's because I have a soft spot for slimes and we need more of them.

>Being THIS retarded

But the main thing that was fun about 3.5 flexibility was creating incredibly silly martial builds

I mean sure, they could never hold a candle to the caster builds, but casters in 3.5 were pretty dull in terms of build options when compared to fighters

Personally I love the Trickster/Singer combo. Makes the EK in my party feel inadiquite and flaccid.

5e is less crunchy than 3.5 and alignment basically doesn't exist anymore outside of artifacts which have traditionally used it, yeah. The classes are more balanced in power, but don't let that make you think even for a second caster supremacy is fixed. There's nothing very wrong or very right with 5e, it's basically like someone took an average out of all previous editions

Also, there are almost no published materials and most of the ones we have are ports from older stuff into 5e, so keep that in mind

Only if you use a shit assed setting where magic users are commonplace.

Then... don't use GFB? You don't even need to when you can Hand Crossbow+SS meme, if doing optimal damage is your goal. Hell, if you do that, you can even be just as effective in melee range, and can Shield if someone tries to hit you.

Or something I saw that worked rather well in ranged combat against enemies shooting back- Mold Earth, Bonus Action Attack, full attack every turn after that. Basically everywhere you relocate to build yourself a 3/4ths cover mini-rampart to hide behind. It's not a direct attack but it's still rather useful.

>Exchanging a short rest resource for 9th level spells
>unattractive
Tell ya what, I'll use it in a game you run, just for fun. I mean, it is a fairly unattractive feature, but I am sure I could have fun with it.

Jesus christ look at the graph, the green line meets the wizard, but falls short of the fighter. Implying that fighter is more powerful than it should be and wizards are just as powerful as they should be

>Being surprised that a casterfag is retarded

I'm thinking of going variant human. I don't really like Dwarves and I almost always play humans because my party loves playing non humans and I think they're underrepresented, so I'd probably take a level in Fighter for the armor prof. I could go Cleric, but I think that may be a bit too "min-maxy" for my tastes.

I was leaning towards Shadow monk for the teleportation and such but I'm not 100% sold on that either way. I did read through Long Death though and it just seems underwhelming. Maybe i'm misunderstanding something?

One thing that no one mentioned that I count as a negative for 5e is that there are no skill ranks; there is only proficiency and expertise. This means there is very little variety possible in terms of how well trained a person is.

It's why I said larger cities, or does no-one reach level 3 in your setting?

...

I'll admit, this actually made me laugh a little IRL.

How many martial die for a ninth level? I was thinking you would get 9 martial die for giving up a ninth level.

(Which actually seems like a fair exchange to me, the problem is it really puts in perspective how fucking bad martials are compared to casters at high levels)

>reach level 3
>wizard king hears about some local bitch starting shit
>teleports you into the plane of fire
>NPCs stop trying to take class levels

I think his point is there's no cantrip that lets him attack and then attack again with a magic arrow like you could with a melee EK. Also isn't GWM equivalent with SS, but stacks with booming/GFB, making crossbow+SS not optimal?

I mean, if we take most DnD setting books and published adventures as a baseline, yeah, having more than 5hp basically makes you a demi-god.

Pros
>More interesting and varied design of races and classes
>Less imbalance between casters and martials
>Faster character creation
>simpler mechanics

Cons
>Less content
>Not a lot of options for later game characters
>Simpler mechanics

Pretty much the most significant change is that the game isn't trying to encourage multiclassing in the same way 3.5 is.
Prestige classes don't exist instead each class has a list of subclasess that they can choose from on levels 1, 2, 3 that give you new powers at higher levels.
Multiclassing does exist and has replaced some elements of prestige classes.
In order to take a level in a second class, you not only need to have certain ability scores to satisfy your original class, but also the class your are multiclassing into.
As a result most characters don't mulitclass and most players ignore multiclassing in favor of getting the higher level abilities of their original class, which oftentimes are very powerful.

Dark Sun?

Technically yeah you can GWM on Boom Blade IIRC but I personally think the utility of a 120 foot range and +2 on all attacks outweighs it.

17 damage is more than 200 damage that doesn't hit because you can't reach or you miss by 1 AC.

Y'know, this is a question I've been thinking about. How common are higher level characters? I'm not really too sure.

Depends on the setting.

OK, you are either messing with me (distinctly possible), or I am explaining this really badly

When I say "above" I do not mean vertically, I mean it is on the "greater" side of the green bar, either above it or to the left of it, same as the bard and paladin. I do not mean that just because the fighter has more martial ability that it is better

Unless the whole graph is a joke and I'm just overanalyzing

Is there a tutorial for DMing on roll20 anywhere? Also, what are the problems caused by turning short rests into 15-20 minutes instead of a whole hour?

that's honestly pretty retarded though, that means it's nearly impossible to strike someone with a sword and not kill them. Like, even if you aimed for a cut on the arm, they're probably going to end up bleeding out on the ground.

It depends on your setting.

Keep in mind how far 5e has tried to step away from "le magic emporium," though.

Do you legitimately have autism? Were you unable to learn how to read graphs in school?

>Exchange 9 martial dice for a 9th level slot
>cast a 9th level spell
>Short rest
>repeat ad nasseum

You see that Blue Circle way off in the top right corner. Yeah, the graph is a joke, thrown together in MS paint.

The part about Gishes wanting to be better at melee than fighters and better at magic than wizards isn't a joke though. Gishfags are literally THAT retarded.

>autism intensifies

Oh I see

The reality of the positioning of the bard, paladin and what gishfags want had convinced me that it was intended as a proper representation

See:

Yeah bro, the player characters are special by default. At level 1 you're basically creame of the crop.

reminder that "le bladesinger xdd" is a giant meme

you are still just a wizard

Literally just depends on the setting. I'm currently playing a game on Fridays where an entire city of 15+ casters and their lackeys are trying to exploit a mountain of deific gore, and a game on Sundays where my lvl 14 Sorcerer is one of the most powerful men in all recorded history.

>Fuck an entire subsection of the game

Why are you so angry about people enjoying the game?

>Overall I'd say 5e's biggest flaw over 3.x is it takes away a good chunk of flexibility and customization from players, and gives maybe about half that power to the DM and chucks the rest.
And nothing of value was lost. Buildfagging has always been cancer. My dream is a /5eg/ that talks about their games more than it does about "builds"

You can specify non-lethal damage when you make a melee attack.

Otherwise, yes, getting shot even in the leg by a crossbow is very often lethal without modern medical technology.

>My dream is a /5eg/ that talks about their games more than about "builds"
Okay then, why don't you talk about your games, friend?

>My dream is a /5eg/ that talks about their games more than about "builds"
There are other threads for storyfagging and whining about that guy. This thread is for talking about the game, that means the mechanics of the game.

I'm thinking of making this a war cleric / kensei monk for flavor and proficiency reasons

Nothing. I wouldn't do it but that's because I like to make rests take more time not less. It allows me to reason out background events more.

Am I going insane?

I can buy that flavor. Start out as a militant, overzealous devout and mellow out/get existential about the art of war and fighting as you advance into kensei. Just be aware that your caster abilities are going to be relatively shit. You're pushing the bounds of viability for the multiclass just trying to hit 4th level spells

He fucked up the quoting on the deleted post and then remade it correctly.

Because complex builds are not that mechanically relevant in this system, and they are never relevant for the purpose of having fun unless you do something incredibly stupid.
>This thread is for talking about the game, that means the mechanics of the game.
We're going to disagree about that. People posting stories, DM advice, asking feedback on rulings etc. is far more interesting and productive than another chain of shitposts about Eldritch Blast or gishfags.
>Okay then, why don't you talk about your games, friend?
I do whenever I have one, but my current group isn't 5e. I've had an idea about a campaign revolving around the party as a knight-errants, but it'll be maybe a month or two before I begin it

The more I play 5e, the more I realize that 4e was the best Edition of dnd. The only problem is that nobody plays it. Paradise is lost and we burned the map.

How does 5e compare to pic related? I'm running it right now.

yes.

Material components still allow for Counterspell to trigger

If a DM is asking for advice specific to 5e then sure it belongs here, but if he's asking how to draw a map or something non-game specific then saying it should be here rather than any other thread is silly.

You think this is bad, you should have seen the last topic's gishfag posting. It was truly a wonder to behold. Like the internet equivalent of a trainwreck where the conductor survives the derailing then gets right in a new train to do it again.

Maybe it's just because I post on Veeky Forums but at it's worst /5eg/ is pretty tolerable.

So accurate it hurts

You can hide most material components so enemies would never be any wiser.

I won't deny that gishes are sound from a damage per round perspective and utility perspective, especially with how overpowered hexblade is.

But my problem with them is that like martials they just aren't as interesting as full casters.

If 5e has fun martial combat, then the Gish fag complaints would probably disappear.

>If 5e has fun martial combat, then the Gish fag complaints would probably disappear.

How do I create better house rules that appear completely fair and are not a source of my butthurt from one autismlord who constantly tries to break the game? One of my players is bragging over the Discord how his level 10 bard is going to be able to get off five attacks and a spell in the same turn thanks to Swift Quiver and College of Swords, and it's making the other players who have lives and can't min/max anymore a bit wary and uncomfortable since they won't be able to do anything since he's already party leader from higher Charisma and has first initiative in combat.

What specifically do you disagree with? That 5e has boring martial combat or that if the problem was fixed the Gishfags would be satisfied?

>If 5e has fun martial combat
COMBAT ISN'T THE WHOLE GAME. People will never stop whining about martials until they have anything resembling the same level of non-combat utility.

A high level wizard and a high level fighter both need to sneak into somewhere. The wizard has TONS of spells he can use to make this a complete non-issue. The fighter can make dex checks, probably with disadvantage because of their armor.

Problems that combat can't solve are your friend, user.

Gishfags will never be satisfied, because they're the kind of snowflakey autists who make Deviantart OCs and want to be better with swords than fighters and better at magic than wizards and are basically the faggots who want to be an anime character soooo badly that even Mystic doesn't satisfy their spergtism.

*Teleports behind u
"Nothen personnel kid"

The classic answer to this dilemma was giving the fighter magic items that allowed him to cast spells

In early editions of D&D, the fighter was much more likely to get a sword with Wishes or some shit just by using the loot tables than the magic-user was to reach the appropiate level and then get the spell.

Not him, but gishfags are never satisfied.
Even when PF introduced the magus you had people saying "Okay, but what if I wanted someone who could fight AND cast 9th level spells? This isn't good enough."