>Unearthed Arcana: Elf Subraces (No new UA this month)
media.wizards.com
>Trove
rpg.rem.uz
>5etools
lithdoran.github.io
5etools.com
>5etools latest update-
mega.nz
Use the Readme to get it working if you're computer illiterate, or ask for help ITT.
>Resources
pastebin.com
Previous thread:
Bot spammed to oblivion
Thread Question:
Who was your favorite 5E character to play so far?
Back in 1st and 2nd, Paladins never had to choose a god. They just had to tithe to a religious lawful good institution.
Of course, if you went with the Complete Guide to Paladins, you had to belong to a church.
Or serve a philosophy instead, where upon he could also tithe to non-religious lawful good organization, such as a hospital.
But then 2e was weird times, you could have clerics of philosophies as well. Theoretically you could have a Cleric of Atheism.
My campaign revolves around the players hunting and killing eldritch abominations. The fighter has an abnormal, pitch black greatseord, and every time he slays an aberration, a new star or celestial body appears somewhere on the blade. I've been telling him to write down 1/??, 15/?? in the sword's stat line each time, so he knows something is up, however, I have nothing defined yet.
I was thinking about making the sword a shasrd of some elder god or old one, or something related, such as a piece of a gate meant to keep the Far Realm sealed (a la 4e Shardminds). I have alluded to Ioun being a god, so I might go that way with it.
I am mostly stuck on what kind of power to give him with this. He's a half-orc Monster Hunter archetype fighter. Party of 5 at 3rd level, quickly approaching 4th. I was thinking of varying minor abilities, ie making him stronger and faster as an enhancement, some kind of improved attack, perhaps a spell power or two. I'd like to keep it fluffy, so something tinged with the alien and insane nature would be neat.
Can tiny servants speak?
I want to make little shitposting bots that cling to me and constantly spout profanities at my enemies.
What is the best 'Battlemage' build /5eg/?
Fighter EK/Wizard? Paladin/Sorcerer?
Really feels like a question of fluff most of the time, but I don't see why an oath wouldn't be able to give you powers that do radiant damage, you just maybe don't know what force or deity it is that has given you power, you only know that your oath is true to you and that that conviction has given you power.
I could see with someone really good at describing things just do a detour around the fact that it is radiant damage. With a smite for instance "There was an intense energy emenating from him, as if his conviction to protect these villagers from this assailant made him greater in that moment. As he drew his blade and slayed the man where he stood with a quick and decisive blow, cleaving the man in two, I could have sworn his blade lit up with an intense light as if guided by the same energy that was emenating off of him. When the deed was done, the energy faded quickly and the carefree kindhearted man that he was returned." Something like that. Instead of going "He draws his sword and his sword is beaming with intense light, granted to him by his deity and he strikes the enemy down". You can be more low fantasy/sneaky about it.
Probably EK 7/War Wizard 13.
War cleric.
Most magic happens through warlocks or non-spellcasting special abilities when you apply the homebrew to PCs. This informed the idea that pact magic was the "default" supernatural system, and later that while spiritual creatures were innately able to control magic, worldly/mortal things need to bind themselves to spirits in some way to access these gifts. As the only other casters are EK fighters and AT rogues, paladins and rangers, this became a way to inform how their magic came about.
This made the find familiar spell transition from an option to something all casters, including people who took feats like magic initiate, could do innately. The spell was how spirits bound to you, the familiar a form they took to accompany you on the go.
Rituals were expanded on. I don't have time to go into detail, but essentially in addition to expanding the list of ritual spells, it also included some things we made up to specifically and exclusively be used in ritual form. In order to perform rituals you need to summon spirits to do them for you, and this meant doing them in an ideal environment in ideal conditions for the kind of spirit you needed, and a sacrifice of some kind to serve as bait. I'm sure you can see where that is going.
Play generally involved a shorter list of races, monsters, etc that existed within the world, and centered on the idea of the planes beyond the Prime Material being mostly inaccessible and wholly incomprehensible. Most games rarely saw high levels.
Either a pure cleric or bladesinger desu
I’m actually planning for a heist and crime-based campaign for myself down the line, so these might help you too:
reddit.com
reddit.com
It might also be worthwhile to check out the Blades in the Dark rulebooks and stuff for inspiration. I plan on stealing the flashback mechanic and using it myself.
The face is usually someone who is playing a class that either operates off of Charisma, is trained in social skills, or both. They’re called the face because they are most often called upon to represent the party or do the smooth talking, sometimes becoming the most recognizable or sociable one.
Take a look at the PHB and see what looks fun. I think Bards and Rogues are the classics, but you could also be a pious and commanding Paladin, a Warlock that taps into their patron’s power to fool and deceive the masses, a Wizard who simply knows the facts of the matter and can prove his way, and so on. Sounds like your group relies heavily on in-character roleplay and think you’re suited to the roll.
But remember you aren’t pigeonholed and there’s no requirement to fill roles like you’re in an mmo guild. Think about what kind of game mechanics you would enjoy and what kind of story you want your character to have.
I don't understand. Is there a gas leak in here?
Are there any other ways to build 'healer' than just life domain cleric? The group im in needs a healer but I'm kinda miffed if that means im limited to only one class/domain, I mean Ill still do it I just wish i had some choice in the character I make.
Bards don't have the sheer damage output of other classes, nor do they have the on demand utility of the Warlock. They don't get some of the stronger spells in the game afforded to Clerics and Wizards, and they don't get heavy armor like other frontline fighters. They're one of the best classes when it comes to support, but for most everything else they're Jack of All Trades, master of none. Standing alone, a Bard would be well equiped to handle a myriad of situations (just mostly not as well as someone who specializes in that situation), but they truly shine as the fifth wheel in any party.
Also they done talk real good-like, so they're always useful when you need to talk yourself into good graces or out of a bad situation.
>Do all the popular systems us that godawful save system?
Do you not like roll-under saves in general or the saving throw matrix? Some, like Swords and Wizardry, use a single save score, but DC saves and roll-unfer come from different design philosophies which also wouldn't mesh very well with OSR games without first doing some 3e-style unification of mechanics. Plenty of people also prefer roll-under for practical reasons, namely, that it keeps caster power somewhat bound because most their really dangerous spells won't scale to become stronger as they grow in level
It's also worth mentioning that you don't use the whole matrix at once, which is something that confuses people coming from newer systems. You only use the big-ass table to record your new scores at each level up, not to look it up during play.
>(and I mean hit bonuses that scale differently by class, not the way THAC0 is rolled. BAB from 3e would fall in this category too).
Lamentations of the Flame Princess has a different formula where it only scales for the fighter, at half fighter level, but it assumes that most enemies are going to have low-ish AC and that it'll rarely if ever go beyond 18. There are some that don't use AC at all like Into the Odd and IIRC The Black Hack, but those are more questionable.
>Charm person and its months-long duration against low int targets comes to mind.
Not really that relevant when you consider OSR lends itself best to a playstyle without a lot of focus in "social" encounters
There was a bot spam last thread. I don't know if we escaped it. This may be a sacrificial thread to draw it away.
You're not restricted to one domain, any cleric can heal better than most of the other classes.
What I don't like is starting with only being able to make a save on a roll of 16 and ended with making it with a roll on a success of 6. Becoming objectively better at saves regardless of the threat level is dumb, and the fixes I've seen like giving penalties to saves against specific effects are really clunky.
That system doesn't sound so bad but i would prefer it not be there at all. Problem is that without that fighters usually get nothing in osr since those systems insist that fighters never get anything interesting whatsoever.
>not really relevant
Man fuck off. People say the same thing about high level wizards just because they never play at high levels. Doesn't mean the system isn't shit in how it handles something just because you ignore it. 5e admittedly has awful nature survival mechanics even though I ignore them, for example.
What the fuck is going on in this thread?
>give martials a free feat at every ASI
Are they better than casters now?
>be druid
>resting in woods
>hear screaming
>paladin and me see what's happening
>rest of group stays behind to defend camp
>find woman
>claims caravan was attacked
>claims her husband was brutally hurt and thing took her child
>paladin and me split up to help both husband and child
>head towards husband
>paladin retroactively says it's dangerous and goes to camp with woman
>claims they'll look for child during the day
>woman is hysterical but randomly calms down and says ok
>DM awkwardly begins to get worried as I head towards caravan, says it's too far
>turn into a deer and dash towards it
>party rolls initiative as powerful demon descends upon their camp
>I find caravan but there's nothing there and husband is ripped limb from limb
>sprint back to party
>meanwhile party TPK'd to the demon and gets disembowled
>DM explains in gruesome detail their deaths
>arrive to the carnage and DM makes me roll stealth at disadvantage
>god roll
>demon doesn't notice me
>DM asks if I fight to defend my friends
>tell him that they're ripped apart, nothing I can do
>sprint away
>DM gets annoyed and makes me do 5 stealth checks, god rolls continue and I escape
>party is upset because they're dead
>DM turns them into ghosts and they kill demon easily
>they get massive XP
>party gets revived somehow
>go to nearest town
>they refuse to open gate unless I kill demon
>can't solo it so I walk away
>travel the roads alone and DM doesn't roll any encounters
>make i
>don't have money since left it at camp
>work for innkeeper but he's charging me more than I can make in a day
>DM has to railroad party to the city where I'm at
>explains he wanted to open city after demon was killed
>didn't plan anything else
>party finds me
>yell I saw them die
>DM laughs and makes me roll on indefinite madness table
>rolls madness where I assume I've got a powerful enemy and he's sending his agents after me
>DM gets annoyed when I tell everyone in town they're undead sent by the demon to kill me
A bot that's copy pasting posts from the last thread.
If I’m being a gish fag is it even worth taking agonizing blast?
>DM gets annoyed to the point he asked why I'm still playing
>explained I've done nothing unusual and everything has been done due to the die, he's given me a madness
>he explains the powerful enemy + agents doesn't need to be the party
>argue it's logical I'd think the dismembered party are undead
>he says there's no logic in fun
>gives party a chance to cure me of this madness but it requires a sacrifice
>nobody in the party wants to pay for it
>party adventures without me
>DM makes me reroll a new character if I'm not going to play to his whims
Sure for a ranged option.
The old curses had attached a vulnerability with a higher percentage chance (5%) of the spell hitting you regardless of if you used the charges or not. I felt that was a big hit for a character and would really make these feel less like a magic item with a dangerous quirk to a thing that could end up killing you just because you wanted to cast a spell.
I have a guy on Reddit saying the curse is still too strong and recommends I change it to something like...
>"Cursed. This staff is cursed, immediately after you expend a charge from this staff there is a 2 percent chance that the staff will overcharge causing you to make a Dexterity saving throw. You take 1d6 [X Elemental] damage per remaining charge on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one. This damage ignores resistances."
As to make it less AOE focused and dangerous to your allies.
Wish there more support for thrown weapon.
In the original context of the rules, it was unlikely that you'd ever get away with, say, using Charm Person on a king or something like that. Firstly because the king would probably be a high-level character who had a fair chance of passing the saves, within the pseudo-feudal Arthurian thing a lot of old published settings had going
Second, because monsters rarely were fully statted, so that thing about Charm Person lasting months was probably meant to be directed at the PLAYERS, presumably to be fixed by killing whoever casted it.
About fighters not getting nice things, those systems also assume you're playing in a game where characters dying is a common nuisance. It's true that the magic-user is very powerful if you get him to the point where he's casting level 6+ spells, but good luck making one survive that long when they have d4 hp, can't use armor and cast spells, they always go last on the initiative order when casting and can be interrupted by someone whacking them on the face or gagging them, and "save-or-die" is a unironical save category in almost all OSR games.
Fighters were by far the most "survivable" class. There was some powercreep with the magic-user eventually, but getting a magic-user to high levels was really an ordeal on its own right and they remained fairly frail even then. I would argue that the gap in power between high level B/X fighters and magic-users is similar to the one in 5e. Also, getting the spells you wanted wasn't always something to depend on
It's also true that fighters get a bit dry after a while, but newer games seem to have realized it and now usually have the decency to at least include a list of basic "maneuvers" to differentiate them. There's also things like DCC and its Mighty Deed of Arms, which is basically "fightr rolls a die and above a 3 he suceeds lmao"
Would "polite to a fault" be an annoying character flaw for a healer? Im thinking of making a hermit nature cleric who tends to do things like ask for permission to pick up injured characters and carry them to safety, even to the point of refusing to pick up unconscious people because "They can't give consent" but I'm worried it my come across as annoying to the other group members.
What are some good character flaws I can have as a hermit like nature cleric besides being polite to a fault. I want to play an interesting character but I don't want to ruin the other players fun while doing so.
Strength for intimidation was a fucking stupid idea.
That very picture that was just posted is just as much proof of it. A low charisma barbarian would just stand there making threats and not actually doing what you see in the picture, a high charisma barbarian would do what's in the picture. Having more muscles doesn't change that.
Unless your muscles have fucking brains in them that say 'Yeah, go corner that guy and make him feel small'?
Charisma is an objective measurement of your ability to influence people.
Strength is an objective measurement of your muscle mass.
Your muscle mass is not able to influence people by itself. You use charisma to influence people with your muscles. It's easier to intimidate a guy who's scared of big, muscular men when you have high strength, yes, and maybe the DC would be a lot lower than if a wizard did it, but you faggots need to stop circlejerking and having fun and use stats the proper way before I ban fun completely.
Here's a check done properly: You need to identify a cure for something, in a bottle, and you're not sure what it is.
You use int(medicine) even though medicine is usually wisdom as you're doing memory recall and testing if your character has noted this cure before.
>Who was your favorite 5E character to play so far?
I played an Aarakocra Barbarian way back at release because the DM wanted a more monstrous setting and made some of the humanoids in the book as playable races using these stats from the DMG as inspiration. I would dive attack for bonus damage, grapple, fly up and drop enemies for pretty decent damage. I really played up the bird aspect, sleeping in trees outside the city and shit. For all the whining from people that flight at level 1 breaks the game, any semi-competent DM can deal with it easily enough, especially since, you know, dungeons.
Then the game fell apart because the DM was apparently hitting on the female player via PM (on Roll20) and she left because of it then he disappeared right after. Which sucked, because he was a fucking awesome DM besides that.
>You say this as if only a subset of people are scared of big muscular men. If you're getting threatened by a big dude it doesn't matter how eloquent he is when speaking for you to get intimidated.
This is a fantasy world where the scariest fucking things are wimpy people in robes with books. They can speak a single word and you just fucking die.
>Technically if you want to be correct about it, it IS influencing through your muscles as you say, so it would still technically be a charisma check, but then you could add half your str modifier, or the whole modifier to it, since the muscles DO help.
Just no. If you add it to your modifier, you're assuming that everybody is equally as intimidated by your muscles. The above wizard actually finds your muscles the opposite - your muscles indicate that you've been focusing on working out over reading books, and that you have no chance of escaping when he simply casts 'forcecage' on you. A powerful demon must spar with all sorts of adventurers, and again, muscles aren't going to be what scares them. It'll be holy men, and those with the power of gods.
Muscles should change the DC because it's situational. DC is a flexible goal based on your target, and might be DC 5 against a peasant or DC 0 if you're a big musclefaggot or DC 10 if the peasant just saw you get beat up, but no matter what charisma is a constant and is always just a +modifier to your intimidation roll.
Give me a copy pasta about ranger.
There's a good goddamn reason we don't like homebrew.
1. It rarely offers something you can't already do in the system in terms of flavour. Class concepts are broad enough.
2. It rarely offers something you can't do mechanically that you should be allowed to do. Want to be a strength rogue? Barbarogue, faggot. Wisdom rogue? Just up your wisdom to full, nobody else is going to have as high a passive perception as you with high wisdom.
3. It rarely fits the system. People make shit because 'oh, it was in pathfinder, I want it for 5e too!' and it doesn't fit at all. People think their homebrew should be shared with the world, but as a matter of fact I can understand homebrew being acceptable in the campaign it was made for by the DM who made it, because the DM knows how to regulate it and knows how it is intended to fit into your world. Homebrew is to patch up individual things for yourself, not to overhaul a system that already works yet you think you're better than all the playtesting and work put into 5e. There are some small 'fixes' that work, though.
3. Most people making homebrew don't understand the system anyway, and that's why they homebrew.
4. When someone says 'I'm a [homebrew class]' on here, it makes it harder for us to understand the context without further explanation.
5. When playing with homebrew, it doesn't feel like you win because you work with what you have. You just wrote victory into the rules.
Give me ranger!
what an assblasted post
Am I having a stroke?
>Some UAs are legitimately no better in quality that the average homebrew which gets shat on by 5eg, but since it's "official" people defend it more readily
You're not wrong. There are faggots who allow lore wizard because 'lol it's official'
but UA content is generally of a higher quality than homebrew, almost always. Homebrew is a sea of shit with some cream rising to the top that still tastes of shit but isn't as bad. UA is the heavens shitting down, and while it is shit it is divinely-bestowed shit.
>Second, there are many legitimate gaps in the system - for example, we didn't even have rules for tool proficiencies until Xanathar's, and that's still something people defended until Xanathar's got released and it turned out it wasn't by design
Weren't tools left ambiguous by design? Not only would it take up too much space, but it might limit what people can do with them if you give a short list of things that can do 'Oh, you can't do that, it's not on the list'. Skills are supposed to apply when the DM thinks they would apply and tools aren't important.
However, yes, there are gaps and problems in the system that needs filling. Matt Mercer's Blood Hunter actually has something of a place flavourwise as a 'bladelock-ish glass cannon fighter', even if the homebrew is still underpowered. However, many people try to fill gaps they didn't realize were already filled, or even if they identify the gaps they hit one of the many other problems with homebrewing.
UA revised ranger for the one that pick at first level and phb ranger for multiclass, seem fair?
I came here hoping I could shitpost about how my DM worries me, but now I'm just worried in general.
If I want to build a non-magic ranged character, what's the best way to go about it?
Fighter? Ranger? Bow? Crossbow?
>Then the third book in the trifecta is the monster manual. which contains lists of monsters and their stats. But you really don't need that at the beginning. Your dungeon master should get at least two or thee pre-made adventures under his belt before he tries making entire adventures from scratch. And the pre-made adventures you get will have monsters in them already.
Go with premade to learn the ropes, that's plenty reasonable.
>If the dungeon master is going to be doing it for the first time (other than that first starter-set adventure), you'll also want the dungeon master's guide. It has a ton of tips for running the game. Tips for improvising, and making challenging fights, and how to add rules when you think you want a crafting system or whatever.
Ok, will get that too. I think the starter set comes with all of it? Actually, probably not. I think I read it only comes with information to help characters up to level 5. Does it take a few sessions to reach that point?
>The starter set is a good choice: it comes with pre-made characters, a condensed rulebook, and a set of pre-made quests to go on.
>If nobody you are going to play with has ever played before, it's definitely the way to go.
Ok
>this game is really simple after you know what you're doing, and very tricky when you don't yet.
So like most things, once one's learned it, it becomes easier. Makes sense!
Because land druid got extra spells, and wotc decided that was a good trade-off.
In my experience barbs are tanky because of resistance to damage while raging. Also, I can't check at the moment, but my players' barb/fighter has more HP than the druid, even adding on the HP from one bear form. They're something like level 8, though. Also, the druid's healing was subpar even at that level until I have her a staff of healing, but that might have just been spell choice not taking her in a healing direction. Still, I get your point, I think- you don't seem to like that moon druids can get more HP. I still say that enemy spellcasters, or things that target saves, are the way to deal with that, or even just put in more enemies to fight. Why wouldn't a group of intelligent whatevers target the big fucking bear first? But if you don't like moon druids because of taste, there's nothing I can say to change your mind and I don't want to change your mind. You play however you want, and that's fine. You haven't even said that you've banned moon druids, which is the only thing I might take issue with.
Did you reply to the wrong post, user?
issa bot
Cont.
>Feinting Attack
Good. Nice alternative to the people who don't want to Dual Wield it fits their flavor just fine.
>Focus of the Mind
Wooo... that's strong. How about Wisdom saves only it being a Wisdom based class and all I'd feel better with it not working with all the mental stuff.
>Goating Strike
I really don't expect a Rogue to do this due to the increased odds of them getting hit, but it also fits the style of a taunting Samurai figure, so It works flavor wise.
>Instinctual Insight
This is kinda the Inquisitive thing, can you explain to me why these guys get it?
>Myrmidon's Dodge
So you are going up against Uncanny Dodge with an AC increasing feature... I don't think this one works quite as well due to the class having something that can already lower damage. Also, it should probably only work against weapon attacks.
>Parry
I'm biased I hate this feature, it should work like a monks deflect missiles, but it doesn't, its worse than your Uncanny Dodge even though flavor wise it works perfectly. Mechanically no one will be using this over uncanny dodge or even Myrmidon's Dodge.
>Precision Attack
I always pick this up for my Swashbuckler/Battle Masters and it fits great mechanically and flavor-wise, but it also even further pushes the idea that I really don't think you need Extra Attack for this subclass.
>Riposte
So this is the big one for me, EVERY single Myrmidon will pick this up and it will only further increase their odds of sneak attacking twice per round. They can also pick up Sentinel to really drive that point home as well, to me though flavor wise this is perfect you have given a Rogue an ability that can give them multiple sneak attacks per round... with Polearm Master as well. This is without taking 3 levels into another class to slow your sneak attack progression and other class features.
....for what purpose
To show Veeky Forums doesn't have janitors.
Wonderful.
Ranger would be the best, honestly. If your game goes past 11 then Fighter will catch up, though.
>Have you playtested this with GWM/F+PAM?
Yes, actually, in the game I'm in now we're just about to hit level 9.
So far, I've found that it's a pretty strong option damage-wise, but my AC is a little on the low side at 15 with bracers of defense.
V. Human with standard array, so my scores are 18, 12, 14, 8, 14, 10. Considering we have a Conquest Paladin and a Sorlock I don't feel like I'm really making anybody else's damage irrelevant.
I wanted something unique from Swashbuckler's one-man sneak attack and this is what I've come up with. If you or anyone else has suggestions for a more unique sneak attack modifier that works with the flavor so I can dump applying sneak attack to 2h weapons, then I'm open to it.
>make the dice recover on a long rest to encourage people not to play this over battlemaster.
Considering the things that come with Battlemaster (action surge, better hit die, better extra attacks) I don't think that's really a concern.
>late extra attack
Couldn't find anything interesting to put there. Been kind of looking at it off and on for changing but never found something I liked more, or that was as consistent.
>Why would I Astra? Why does it cost so much?
That...is a good question.
>Focus the Mind
It's Fighter (Monster Hunter)'s maneuver word for word. Plus the Myrmidon/Swordmaster tend to favor a slightly higher Res statcap, especially in the recent games.
>goading and instinct
both are pretty much filler. Might end up cut.
>stat the raijinto and stormsword.
I guess, since I have the holidays off from classes and I'm going to be working on this anyways.
Heavy crossbow Fighter.
Stop boosting martials by making them better at martialing and gve them more utility instead.
Help.
My group of three level 2 players single-handedly defeated an owlbear they were supposed to be running from. What did I do wrong ? They don't even have magic items.
The party is composed of a fighter, sorcerer and knowledge cleric.
Lucky rolls, IMO.
Feats have a wide range of usage beyond combat
Action economy. If you'd had two owl bears they'd be toast.
Some do, sure, but if the game is combat focused (which DnD is), taking combat feat is usually better choice.
Some people believe martials NEED GWM&PAM or CBE&SS to be viable at all.
Count your blessings. It's a good thing that happened.
And right now paladins don't need gods and you can have a cleric of war that doesn't actually have a specific god.
>Allow martials to take feats such as SS and GWM
There, they're now balanced until the very late game where spells get really out of hand.
Got a feeling the previous thread had this argument considering that first post.
>ree why doesn't your paladin have a god
Give martial all martial feats.
So you're saying that if some Giga Nigga walked up to you for no reason while glaring at you, you wouldn't be intimidated, even a little?
In nature, creatures are naturally weary of anything that's bigger than the things it's used to hunting, so it would make sense that a dude with 18 STR would be able to intimidate most people, simply because people know, if he wanted to, he could fuck them up without even breaking a sweat.
it's a bot you silly goose
You can make the same argument for people who use CHA for their intimidation too because people aren't always going to be intimidated if you look like a faggot who spends too much time in front of a mirror.
A threat is only as potent as your willingness to go through with it, and as far as anyone is concerned, a floofy bastard with a lute isn't going to make anyone shit their pants in fear anytime soon.
Depends on the setting.
>people aren't always going to be intimidated if you look like a faggot who spends too much time in front of a mirror.
That sounds less like 'High charisma' and more 'Vain but not that high'. Someone with high charisma would pull that look off with sheer style.
Not really, if we're assuming that the dude with STR is going to be considered a fuckboy, why the fuck should we assume that CHAfags are automatically given more importance when CHA depends on the other party being willing to listen and believe what you're saying?
Think about your average CHA class.
>Sorcerer
>Warlock
>Bard
>Paladin
All classes played by THAT GUYS who only want to play them so that they can be the center of attention with their oh so speshul snowflakes while using CHA as a means to bypass roleplay. Being a vain cunt who fixates on themselves comes with the territory of focusing on CHA.
>All classes played by THAT GUYS who only want to play them so that they can be the center of attention with their oh so speshul snowflakes while using CHA as a means to bypass roleplay. Being a vain cunt who fixates on themselves comes with the territory of focusing on CHA.
You might be jumping at shadows here.
Your attractiveness should be determined by con score.
I've literally never played with any CHA class that didn't act like a huge faggot because people associate CHA with "people are obligated to suck my ass and thank me for the opportunity" and I've been playing tabletop for over 5 years, with over a dozen groups, both online and offline.
When you gather a bunch of social retards into the same room and give them a means to avoid icky social interaction while making themselves more important than they actually are, you end up with nothing but pure unlimited faggotry, especially if the GM treats it like how grade mind control.
>umm err I make a convincing argument so the dragon doesn't torch the town *rolls dice*
>t. roleplayer pro
So you've played with shitty people for five years? Have you tried not playing with complete neckbeard idiots who are capable of understanding the concept of 'A person would willingly talk to me without mind control'?
how about rolling the feats in as 11th level upgrades to fighting styles? so when you hit 11th you get a free choice of feat associated with your style
That's like saying 'I get the treasure'. That's a goal, not a plan.
Since you obviously can't read, I'll highlight the important bit for you.
>been playing tabletop for over 5 years, with over a dozen groups, both online and offline.
It's just a constant among CHA characters user, and no, trying to talk to these faggots only causes them to sputter like an old tractor and look indignantly at you for *gasp* trying to meet them halfway on a social issue that could easily be solved by not being an autistic faggot.
Think about it, almost every THAT GUY story can be traced back to someone who decided to play a character who focused on CHA. Hell, the new hot meme build ITT is a sorclock who has unlimited dick cheese.
CHA's nothing but trouble.
>Think about it, almost every THAT GUY story can be traced back to someone who decided to play a character who focused on CHA
That's not how you write 'Wizard'.
>It's just a constant among CHA characters user, and no, trying to talk to these faggots only causes them to sputter like an old tractor and look indignantly at you for *gasp* trying to meet them halfway on a social issue that could easily be solved by not being an autistic faggot.
That sounds like shitty players, not the stat itself.
>Since you obviously can't read, I'll highlight the important bit for you.
Then again; garbage in, garbage out...
Rolled 9 + 5 (1d20 + 5)
>as a paladin, i give the dragon my words.
Ooc I don't know what else to say.
I've been playing with people for well over a decade in group after group. Charisma is fine, that's player issues. Heck, most of my issues have been people who avoid charisma like the plague because 'It doesn't do anything, I'll just talk OOC and ignore the stat if my character needs to be social'.
Please, Wizards are a stale old meme from oldheads and newfags who jumped in with 3.PF.
Literally every full caster class outclasses the Wizard, similarly to how every martial class outclasses the Fighter.
>le you're the problem LMAO
Wow, great retort faggot. The stat itself is garbage and people become trash by interacting with it for too long.
It's like playing a CN Rogue or a Kender, the concept is fine until faggots use it to push their butt pounding faggotry all over your campaign.
I'd honestly rather have CHA be worthless than for morons to treat it like a skip button for roleplay, especially when they also have the audacity to treat it like mind-control just because they rolled an above average number on the die.
There's only so many times I can hear "lel I roll X, that means he must do as I say!" before I want to shoulder check a nigga through a second story window.
>Wow, great retort faggot.
You are the one that started throwing the insults by implying someone disagreeing can't read.
And I'd rather have all stats be useful. Sounds like you just need a GM who can tell players 'That's not how that works'. That's like arguing that your character's int is high so he can automatically win fights by outthinking the other guy.
Because you apparently missed the most important detail of the sentence, which was the fact that it has been a constant across dozens of groups over the course of five years, both online and IRL.
CHA brings out the inner faggot in social retards because it's the only way they can be arsed to express themselves. It's like "Internet Fuckwit Disorder" the stat.
>And I'd rather have all stats be useful.
It's still useful as a casting stat. It doesn't need to be a literal game ender just because people don't want to actually roleplay in a tabletop roleplaying game for casuals.
>Because you apparently missed the most important detail of the sentence, which was the fact that it has been a constant across dozens of groups over the course of five years, both online and IRL.
And I've been playing for a hell of a lot longer than 5 years (Heck, I've a single campaign running that's pulling close to 4 years) and found charisma fine. So clearly this isn't a hard and fast rule.
stop playing with social retards then
Congrats on finding the unicorn in the metaphorical wasteland of tabletop groups, not even mad, I hope you never have to suffer my pain as either a player or a GM.
Easier said than done, have you seen the average thread on Veeky Forums?
>Congrats on finding the unicorn in the metaphorical wasteland of tabletop groups, not even mad,
I think there are entire fields of unicorns out there if you look, considering this has been an ongoing thing with dozens of games with different groups of people. Heck, even random people off Veeky Forums have more often than not been reasonable on that front.
>It's still useful as a casting stat.
Not everyone casts spells with charisma/not everyone casts spells.
>I think there are entire fields of unicorns out there if you look
Believe me, I've tried. Nothing but snowflakes and spergs as far as the eye can see. I've given up on finding a decent group after countless failures.
>Not everyone casts spells with charisma/not everyone casts spells.
So? Not everyone uses STR to make attacks or uses INT when they're a frontline fighter. Not every stat is going to be useful for every character, otherwise you just end up with samey bullshit.
>So? Not everyone uses STR to make attacks or uses INT when they're a frontline fighter. Not every stat is going to be useful for every character, otherwise you just end up with samey bullshit.
Yes but those stats still have skills tied to them and you make saves. Charisma saves basically don't exist compared to the others and with no skills tied to it it's got basically nothing else.
>Yes but those stats still have skills tied to them and you make saves.
Okay? that still doesn't change the fact that not everyone is going to benefit from the same stats regardless of whatever bullshit you give them to help them stay relevant.
I only play Human Champions or Thieves, with no feats
You can't just scrap the skills tied to one skill and keep it remotely an equally valuable choice.