[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/tg/ - Traditional Games


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: 1557865817116.jpg (69 KB, 542x767)
69 KB
69 KB JPG
Paladin edition

>Unearthed Arcana: Artificer v2
https://media.wizards.com/2019/dnd/downloads/UA-Artificer2-2019.pdf

>5e Trove
https://thetrove.net/Books/Dungeons%20and%20Dragons/D&D%205th%20Edition/

>5etools
https://5e.tools/

>Stable releases
https://get.5e.tools/

>Resources
http://pastebin.com/X1TFNxck

Previous thread >>66736302

Let's discuss Paladins. Are you happy with how they've been implemented and updated in 5e? How would you rate and rank the Oaths of Ancients, Conquest, Crown, Redemption, Conquest and Vengeance? What Oaths do you feel like they could or should add?
>>
>>66739842
Paladin is the strongest a class can be without really trying. That's nice for paladins, but it also makes EKs, bladelocks, and almost everything else feel lame in comparison.
>>
>sharpshooter
<-5 to attack roll
lol. should've made an aim action for that.
>>
>>66739842
They fill their niche and then some, they're what rangers should've been in many ways. If paladin is to cleric what ranger is to druid, ranger should've been a prep caster instead of getting another blow to the head.
>>
>>66739842
Oath of Vengeance/Conquest is literally just Paladin for murderhobos, prove me wrong
>>
>>66739868
this exactly. theyre just too cheesy
>>
>>66739842
An anti-caster paladin called Oath of the Divine
>>
>>66739868
imagine if you're a monk how you feel
>>
>>66739912
>Divine
>Fedora reeeeeing begins
>>
>>66739902
im fine with ranger spellcasting working either way. what annoys me far more about ranger are the shit higher level features. paladin gets broken shit like aura of protection, meanwhile ranger has to deal with more favored enemy/terrain garbage and gets to rub dirt in their face.

that and the ranger exclusive spells suck ass compared to the paladin's
>>
File: 1543364532325.jpg (270 KB, 974x1248)
270 KB
270 KB JPG
>>66739842
> pic
fuck i so want to play a dragonborn. why do they have to be so shit?
>>
>>66739868
>high burst dmg
>fighting styles
>high ac
>healing
>d10 hit dice
>multi attack
>buffing
>auras
>high cha for social interactions
>utility spells
What were they thinking?
>>
>>66739936
>+3 to stats
>Mediocre AoE scaling breath weapon
>Resistance to 1 damage type
>Draconic language
I'd personally give them the dragon fear racial feat or the claws+scaly hide feat for free
>>
>>66739924
Yeah, that sucks.
If it were adaptive, as in you could change the terrain/enemy after a days prep or something, it'd be cool. At present it's normally dead weight unless the DM panders to the player. Prep spells would still make more sense though, I don't know why they need to limit a caster that's already tied down a dozen other ways.
>>
>>66739936
Those are half dragons. Dragonborn have disgusting tentacle hair instead of horns and are tailless.
>>
>>66739937
Guilt from all the lawful stupid shit they put the old ones through.
>>
>>66739998
as i said
>why do they have to be so shit?

doesnt stop at garbage stats and racials

>>66739971
really not sure how useful clas+scaly hide feat would be. dragonfear unfortuantely uses the same resource as your breath weapon, so it's really just replacing that.
>>
>>66739998
This is correct. Dragonborn are shit, they are not even one tenth dragon.
>>
>>66740028
>Tfw a human draconic sorcerer technically can be more dragon than an actual anthro lizard
>>
>>66739936
Just make the breath damage the same as a cantrip's and let them use it a number of times equal to their con per rest instead of just once.
>>
>>66740044
They already are more dragon than any dragonborn ever will be.
We got a dragonborn in our party and most of the time he is bitching about his shit race, not having dark vision, wanting the racial feat for free and hating on real dragons.
Why play a furry or what ever the term is for a stupid monster class and whine about it for months to come?
>>
maybe the simplest, least homebrewy way to play dragonborn is to just refluff tiefling.

still has resistance, +2 dex or cha is more useful, burning hands is like breath weapon but actually decent and you get a cantrip, another spell and darkvision on top of that. just gotta replace infernal with draconic
>>
>>66740003
I wonder when they'll feel guilty about monk
>>
>>66740098
never. they dont think about it. too busy giving wizards more bullshit spells
>>
While wielding a melee weapon, you can use your bonus action swing your weapon in the air, making a burst of flames come out of it. The ignition lasts for 1 minute, or until you lose your concentration (as if you were concentrating on a spell).
While the sword is ignited:
- You can use the cantrip Firebolt through it. Wisdom is your spellcasting ability.
- You add 1d6 fire damage to your melee attacks with the ignited weapon.
You can use this feature once per short rest.

Opinions on this for a boon? How strong is it?
>>
>>66740155
Sounds fun, but why wisdom? Is this for a Cleric or a Druid? If for a cleric, whe does he not use sacred flame or another damage cantrip? And if a Druid, is he able to use it in beast shape?
>>
What is revised ranger? If I'm looking at gloom stalker should I go revised or not?
>>
>>66740181
>What is revised ranger?
a frontloaded as fuck attempt to fix the ranger and failing at it
>>
>>66740172
It's for a light cleric. He does have sacred flame, but it's a little extra to tie him to his deity.
>>
White dragons are the best dragons because they're dumb as fuck
>>
How do I build a paladin without a strength bonus but with a charisma bonus?
My Str/Cha would be +2/+3 instead of +3/+2 and I can increase it to +3/+4 at level 4. Would I get GWM, or +2 to strength at level 8.
>>
>>66740233
Be +2 Dex instead of +2 str. You need 15 str to wear the good heavy armors, but you only need 14 Dex to get the most out of medium armor, that way you can to make +5 Cha at 8.
>>
>>66740233
>take oath of the ancients
>take a three level archfey tomelock dip for shillelagh
>>
What kind of boons can you give to a wizard without making it even more broken?
>>
I've got a question about the Magical Secrets from Lore Bards.

So every level bards get to change one of their spells out for a different one if they want. Am I allowed to change one of my bard spells to spells of a different class once I unlock magical secrets? Or would I be allowed to change the spells of a different class out for a different spell from a different class? Or am I just stuck with those spells from the other classes and there's no way for me to switch them up?
>>
>Step 1

Use Minor Alchemy to turn 1 cubic foot of gold into wood.

Carry it around as wood.

Combat starts.

>Step 2

Use Telekinesis on the cube of wood. The wood turns to gold (40 pounds of wood = 1000 pounds of gold).

Move it over the enemy's head.

>Step 3

What would the damage roll be for 1000 pounds falling 10 to 20 ft ?

What should the save be, if any?
>>
>>66740315
1d4 bludgeoning damage
>>
Fighting Style: Iaijutsu
Attacks from the sheath have +2 bonus to the attack roll. After making an attack, you can immediately sheath your weapon as a free action.

Balanced?
>>
>>66740315
>What should the save be, if any?
Surely it would be a relatively easy dex save? I guess it depends if you did it stealthily or not.
>>
>>66740315
DC 10 Dex Save
>>
>>66739842
>Let's discuss Paladins. Are you happy with how they've been implemented and updated in 5e?
I don't like how little their oaths matter game-play wise. A lot of their archetypes play more or less the same. The biggest outlier is probably Conquest, which really only starts to become different at level 7. Sure, they have some niches through their different spells and CDs, but you're still playing mostly the same class.

Mostly I just wish that their level 3 feature was passive instead of being a glorified warlock spell, but maybe I'm just being autistic.
>>
>>66740332
>you can immediately sheath your weapon as a free action.
why not just call it a free +2 attack then?

also, fuck off with your weebshittery
>>
>>66740332
>free action
What's that?
You also can't draw mroe than once per turn because you only have one item iteraction once per turn, so even if it's free free, is means nothing.

So +2 to attack but being able to only attack once per turn is crap of the finest shittery
>>
>>66739842
Paladins are pretty well-balanced if you ban charisma class multiclassing, and though I don't think things like Lay on Hands are entirely necessary class features they're held back by virtue of being MAD. One level of hexblade though and you get all sorts of absurdly tanky bullshit or take levels in sorcerer to wreck big encounters with ease. I do wish ranger wasn't such a weak class considering it's supposed to be the druidic counterpart to paladin and fighter could use with some more features that facilitate RP.
As for how I'd rate the oaths
>Ancients, pretty bad channel divinities unless your DM throws lots of humanoid spellcasters at you, absurdly powerful aura, average spell list (misty step is always nice), alright level 15 feature, broken capstone. Mechanically probably one of the best oaths for a shield paladin.
>Conquest, great CDs, best spell list, good aura, okay level 15 thing, good capstone. Solid oath
>Crown's CDs are not terribly useful at higher levels and only salvaged by being bonus action features, the spell list is pretty good and is mostly spells you'd prepare anyway + spirit guardians, which is okay because spirit guardians is a fucking amazing spell on a paladin. The aura sucks, the level 15 feature is quite DM-dependent but in the right campaign can be very powerful (monster using stuns are still really rare), the capstone is one of the weaker ones. Overall I'd probably say this is among the weaker oaths.
>Devotion, the most vanilla LG paladin possible but you can't go wrong with it. If you're taking GWM sacred weapon is easily the most powerful channel divinity option, you won't need turning often but when it comes up it's clutch, the aura is great, at level 15 you'll have disadvantage on getting hit from basically everything besides humanoids and dragons, the capstone is nice but not that relevant.
>>
>>66740373
>why not just call it a free +2 attack then?
1. That is literally archery style
2. As mentioned here >>66740377 he still has to draw to attack, and he can only draw once per turn
>>
>>66740373
Hey, it's not my character.

>>66740377
>>66740388
Any suggestion? The player didn't specify what he wants exactly, just that he wanted a fighting style to attack from the sheath. I might just tell him +2 attack roll like archery and leave the sheathing weebshit as flavor.
>>
>>66740400
>The player didn't specify what he wants exactly, just that he wanted a fighting style to attack from the sheath.
Dueling if it's a one handed sword, GWF if its a two handed sword, defense if he's using it to parry and tell him to stop being a weebscum faggot and reflavour the attack option available to him
>>
>>66740400
Iaido is not about striking better or dealing more damage, is about being always ready. It should be a +X initiative style, never surprised, etc.

Tell him to pick Alert feat.
>>
>>66739904
it's paladins with evil alignments or a backstory that makes them conquerors or have a grudge against a particular foe.
>>
>>66740407
Probably dueling, as drawing a weapon is done with one hand.
That way he gets +2 to damage on drawing movement and he can still make more attacks unlike here >>66740332
>>
>>66739842
So we decided to let our autist DM a oneshot, only for him to almost immediately text us "Gah! No backstories?" and "I planned on building a campaign to follow off of this", after telling us not to worry about backstories, and not even mentioning the latter. We had planned on playing our main DM's campaign after we finished the oneshot. We play today. Since he's already criticizing my build for not being optimized what's a nice jokebuild to fuck around.
>>
>>66740385
>average spell list
ensnaring strike
>>
>>66740407
It's a two handed sword but he doesn't want GWF because it sucks and I agree with him, it sucks.
Defense is not an option as he is fighting unarmored with his 1 level in monk.

>>66740422
Maybe some boost to damage related to initiative then?
>>
>>66740433
He's drawing a greatsword from his back and putting it back after each strike.
>>
>>66740453
>monk fighter multiclass
oh god what is he doing?
>>
Is Paladin of Conquest the best route for a crusading character? Or maybe a Zealot Barb? I'm thinking the first but the latter just seems like it could also work
>>
>>66740464
then that's not iaido
>>
>>66740470
Making his character first and then trying to fit it in the mechanics second, which I really appreciate personally, despite the weird choice.
>>
>>66739842
>Redemption sucks balls in combat-heavy campaigns apart from having hands-down the best spell list. The persuasion CD is very powerful for social encounters, the rebuke thing is kind of shitty but at least it doesn't use your main actions, the aura sucks and will just get you killed faster (why the fuck do crown and redemption get almost identical auras anyway? were they really so lazy?), the level 15 feature is just a bad ripoff of champion's level 18 one unless you're a metagaming prick who shadowboxes party members to initiate fake combat. The capstone is terrible but fortunately nobody plays at level 20.
>Vengeance is all-around great, its amazing spell list and channel divinity options are tailor-made for taking out really big shit on your own, it gets no aura but the level 7 feature is still very good, actually kind of silly when you consider PAM+Sentinel. The level 15 feature just makes you even better at your niche and the capstone is pretty damn good too. Overall my favorite oath, one of the best at low levels.
As for what new oaths they should add, I think they should reconsider outright evil oaths for those edgelord campaigns people play so often. Oathbreaker is really not suitable, it's both kind of broken and the aura can fuck over your own party. UA Treachery was a step in the right direction but it was still too powerful. Perhaps something that encourages team play, as a kind of paladin who spreads his corrupting influence or something similar.
>>
The weird thing about Paladin vs Ranger to me (aside from their blatantly obvious power disparity) is that Paladin is the prepared caster while ranger is the spontaneous one. A Paladin manifests their magic from their conviction to an oath, while a Ranger harnesses the power of the wilderness. A Paladin is a rigid bastion of faith, while a Ranger is a flexible survivalist that adapts to any situation. Why in the world is it not the other way around?

>>66740444
well, what level do you start as
>>
>>66740495
6
>>
File: thumbs up.png (15 KB, 512x512)
15 KB
15 KB PNG
>>66740323
well memed
>>
If I wanted to try one of the dragonmarked races since I like the idea of magical tattoos, what would be a fun one?
>>
>>66740445
Ensnaring strike is a great spell, yeah, but apart from misty step the rest of the spell list is really underwhelming.
>>
>>66740471
Depends on your preferred playstyle
>>
>>66740503
That's just high enough for a vuman pam/war caster/spell sniper(booming blade) fighter.
>>
>>66740332
Fucking week, Iai are not stronger than normal attacks in any way. No samurai would ever sheath his blade mid fight for this technique, it's just good against being surprised.

so:

on the first round of combat you can use your reaction to make a melee attack if the blade is sheathed and you haven't acted yet. done.
>>
>>66740503
Aarakocra barbarian
>Grapple
>Fly 60ft up
>Let go
>>
>>66740474
>>66740470
>>66740453
Wait, I just had an idea so he doesn't have to waste one level in monk because of his autismo of not wanting to wear armor.

Fighting Style: Unarmored
While you are wearing no armor and not wielding a shield, your AC equals 10 + your Strength modifier + your Dexterity modifier.

How does it sound?
>>
>>66740495
>Why in the world is it not the other way around?
Because Wizards of the Coast are absolute hacks
The fact that even revised ranger is pure garbage is telling
>>
>>66740538
What kind of extremely spacious dungeons are you adventuring in? And what kind of DM is letting you play Aarakocra?
>>
is mastermind a good way to mechanics a halfling that is reluctant to fight but always wants to help his friends? hes a backup incase my current foolhardy wood elf fighter dies (he is pretty much the main party tank now after the barbarian got eaten by a yeti)
>>
>>66740570
>extremely spacious dungeons
not him but
>be new dm
>wow all those ranges on spells/longbows, why aren't there more encounters on open fields?
>arctic desert, players see enemies far away
>combat starts, despite having a huge ass battlemap, can't fit minis on them because of the ranges
>spend 3 turns rolling dice, exchanging attacks
>enemies arrive almost dead

and that was the last time I ever made encounters on an open field and the day I understood why d&d is a Dungeon crawler game
>>
>>66740570
The guy said jokebuild. Forgot to mention its bear totem though.
In any case, odds are there'll be a spacious section if it's not outside and there's always interesting terrain to drop some poor sucker into.
>>
>>66740584
>is reluctant to fight
Sorry to burst your bubble but these characters don't work most of the time
>>
>>66740600
could work better as a disabler. "reluctant to fight" as in "reluctant to deal damage to people". but rogue's the wrong class for that
>>
>>66740481
stormwind fallacy
concept is not oppossed to being mechanically good

use kensai, is literally a fighter/monk concept
>>
>>66740584
>>66740626
You could take 3 levels of rogue to get the Mastermind stuff and then a couple in bard or some such to get the support things.

Max support means minimal fighting. You could always just go full bard anyway.
>>
>>66739416
>Spells you cast ignore resistance to damage of the chosen type AND the targets immunity becomes resistance to that damage type.
Elemental adept needs this added to it.
>>
Are grapplers actually useful in 5e or is it more of a meme build?
>>
>>66740596
Wouldn't Eagle totem allow me to dash for additional height though?
>>
>>66740481
Tell him to play a Kensai

>>66740545
Fuck no
>>
>>66740545
why not just double dex instead? It kinda makes more sense.
>>
>>66740649
memery
>>
>>66740653
It would, I was considering Bears increased carry capacity though. Both work.
>>
>>66740661
because that would be even more broken
>>
>>66740667
>>66740653
>>66740596
Take Aspect of Bear, Eagle Totem since you aren't forced to take the same thing as your totem.
>>
>>66740670
>broken
>effectively inferior to simply wearing armor unless you have insane stats

>>66740660
>>66740634
Kensei can't use greatswords. Do you even think before you post?
>>
>>66740649
Grapple, drop prone with the fucker, stand up and hammer him while he's still sprawled=easy advantage and total control until he breaks out by wasting his action or until death where you then seek your next victim.
>>
>>66740688
>greatswords
Use a longsword with 2hands

The more I read you the more I think you're actually the player and not the GM. You just want your char to be broken
>>
>>66740692
I'm 99% sure that you dropping prone doesn't make someone grappled also drop prone
>>
>>66740688
Broken as you're literally giving a unarmed defense++ from monk to fighter which is already better at fighting, so now is a better monk than monk.

For 1 single ASI he rises his AC in 2. While Monk needs two ASIs to rise his AC in 2. Fighter also has 7 ASIs, while monk only has 5. Stop, you clearly can't into homebrewing with any balance.
>>
Is there any way I can add Range bands in 5e?
>>
>>66740275
bump
>>
for a level 6 oneshot, what druid should I run? also, what wildshapes would I be allowed to have since I probably wouldn't be finding more in the session?
>>
What's the best bard for a memebuild?
>>
>>66740742
Moon
From 7th level and beyond Moon balances and becomes more tank than striker
But up till then is awesome at attacking and enduring
>>
>>66740688
>quickdrawing iado greatsword
>quickdrawing a heavy greatsword
How do we stop the anime problem, /tg/?
>>
>>66740733
>>66740275
no you cant. the spells you select with magical secrets become bard spells for you. on level up you can switch between bard spells.
>>
File: spell_storing.png (81 KB, 627x761)
81 KB
81 KB PNG
Without the initial trigger, would you allow casting of featherfall, counterspell or other reaction spells into a ring of spell storing provided the trigger needs to occur to be cast from the ring?
>>
>>66740688
nowhere you said he was using greatswords, is literally the first time you mention it
>>
>>66740764
>solarpunk
okay, the fucks that now?
>>
>>66740764
anime and anarchism go together like
uh...
>>
>>66740718
>For 1 single ASI he rises his AC in 2
No? He raises the same as monk. I literally just changed Wisdom for Strength.
str 14 dex 16, AC = 15
+1 ASI
str 16 dex 16, AC = 16

>Fighter also has 7 ASIs, while monk only has 5
And fighter has also proficiency in heavy armor, which he needs 2 ASIs just to match the Splint armor with 17 AC, removing those 2 and putting both at 5 ASIs.

>fighter which is already better at fighting, so now is a better monk than monk.
Without evasion? Without diamond soul? Do you even know what a monk is about?

>>66740780
see >>66740464
>>
>>66740775
Yes, ignore Crawford's stupid gamist bullshit. Getting a party member to throw harmless punches at you for Shield, lightly hopping off the ground for Feather Fall and Counterspelling your own cantrips would all be easy ways to satisfy Crawford's asinine trigger requirement anyway.
>>
>>66740790
Sorry, I thought you were the same dude as the "10+Dex+Dex".

Anyway your idea is retarded and devoid of any balance. Play kensai.
>>
>Guys, what do you think about this?
>Is retarded and broken, why don't you do this that is supported by the rules
>No, I'll do what I want
Why even come here asking then?. To D&Dwiki with you
>>
>>66740811
I'm waiting for you to explain why the idea is retarded and devoid of balance. So far I've heard no strong arguments against it, or better suggestions.

>Play kensai.
Read the chain of replies.
>>
>>66740782
Solar power? I don't see how the punk angle fits into it though, but they usually forget that part out of every other -punk setting anyway.
>>
Anyone have a decent Warlord homebrew for a Fighter subclass? The one Mike Mearls did is okay, but it's still super rough and feels way to bloated.
>>
>making a fighting style that makes the weapon that can GWM more accurate
this is fucking retarded
archery is busted too but everyone in five-egg will acknowledge that
>>
File: Warlord 3.0.pdf (1.38 MB, PDF)
1.38 MB
1.38 MB PDF
>>66740829
shilling one I made for my own campaign a while back
>>
>>66740710
If you can drag them every other direction as you move, why not down? It's grey, sure, but it seems to follow the same logic.
>>
>>66740830
Archery + SS is way more busted than something equivalent with GWF because it's ranged and CBE is a thing.

Any GM with a brain swaps archery and GWF effects.
>>
>>66740830
Its funny how he claims to be for the concept of iaido, and when people tell him "iaido is about initiative and always be ready, so alert feat" he goes "but what about muh damage and muh precision?" Clearly he wants to boost his char, not play a concept.

>>66740688
Monk can't use unarmored defense with greatsword either so why be monk/fighter? You're the retarded here
>>
>>66740600
gonna try to get the gm to let me play a ghostwise halfling that rides a giant owl. we used a gnomish flying machine in our last adventure and our lore bard can turn into a giant eagle so maybe he will allow it
>>
>>66740850
Man, I remember the first months of 5e in where you had all these rogues with Xbow Xpert dip a level in fighter for archery
>>
>>66740854
> Unarmored Defense
>Beginning at 1st level, while you are wearing no armor and not wielding a shield, your AC equals 10 + your Dexterity modifier + your Wisdom modifier.

Are you sure I'm the retarded? Monk can absolutely use unarmored defense with a greatsword. Unless now greatswords are armor.
>>
>>66740850
GWM does give bonus action attacks though so it balances out
Personally I'd make archery +2 damage and just remove GWF, defense is the better option 9 times out of 10 and this only really hurts barbs using unarmoured defence who multiclassed into fighter
>>
>>66740839
I like this, I'll see what my DM thinks about it. Thanks!
>>
>>66740850
Okay, now you'll get players taking GWF with an accuracy boost, GWM and PAM for the same effect but in melee.
>>
>>66740871
np anon just keep in mind the Ready for anything level 7 feature is meant to be friendly creatures within 120ft not just any creature, but I feel like that's obvious to see
>>
>>66740866
It's a bonus on a crit so it's unlikely to trigger often and when it does 90% of times the player forgets to activate it.

I prefer to just use GWF as a +1/+1 so stands between Dueling and Archery. It's not elegant but it's something.
>>
>>66740850
>Any GM with a brain swaps archery and GWF effects.
>Giving +2 to Attack to weapons that can use GWM
No, that's even more retarded.

No weapon that already benefits from GWM or SS should get a +2 to hit. GWM and SS already rises DPR a lot, adding +2 to hit would make things worse.
>>
>>66740883
>It's a bonus on a crit so it's unlikely to trigger often and when it does 90% of times the player forgets to activate it.
Well my player never forgets (he's a half orc barbarian so his crits are big and notable) and the attack also triggers when you defeat a creature which is often enough especially if you run large combats or with mooks which means even more GWM damage
>>
>>66740873
PAM is garbage for anything but paladins outside of a white excel spreadsheet. In game that 1d4 is nothing.
>>
>>66740889
GWM and SS are necessities so martials can be somewhat competitive.
>>
>>66740895
>1d4+15 is nothing
>>
>>66740895
>In game that 1d4 is nothing.
Is 1d4+Str
On barbs is 1d4+Str+Rage
If you also have GWM is 1d4+Str+10
>>
>>66740323
>>66740339
>>66740336
Based & soipilled
>>
>>66740906
>so martials can be somewhat competitive.
*Monk stares into the horizon*
>>
>>66740895
What? 1d4 is literally ONE (1) (uno) damage less than the hand crossbow's 1d6. And you will still stack +STR, Rage, improved divine smite (yes, PAM is good on paladins), magic weapon boosts, hunter's mark etc. Even ignoring all that shit 2d10+1d4 from a halberd+pam is still better than 3d6 from a crossbow
>>
>>66740764
I don't know but they need to stop posting
>>
>>66740918
>laughs in kensei
>>
>>66740911
>>66740912
You can't add GWM to PAM
>Is 1d4+Str
>On barbs is 1d4+Str+Rage
Pitiful. Get something better to do with your bonus action.
>>
>>66740928
>You can't add GWM to PAM
lol
>>
>>66740918
My group introduced this feat:
Chicken Kung-Pao
for a -5 to hit you add +10 to damage on Unarmed attacks and natural weapons
Your unarmed attacks are slashing, piercing or bludgeoning. You can change the type of damage at the begining of your turn and lasts till the begining of your next turn
>>
>>66740924
>single
every
time
>>
File: 1511892151522.gif (2.86 MB, 268x270)
2.86 MB
2.86 MB GIF
>>66740928
>you can't add GWM to PAM
Are you making an attack with a heavy wepaon while using PAM? If so, you get to GWM
>>
>>66740925
Kensei can only SS though
But the real problem is that you only have 5 ASI, and they're going to go to Dex/Wis/Con to stay relevant

So I wouldn't be laughing to hard Mr Kensei
>>
>>66740943
Wow that's fucking dumb. Fuck PAM.
>>
>>66740928
>1d8+Str
>Woah this is awesome
>1d4+Str+6
>Pitiful
Stop huffing glue
>>
>>66740944
v. human
>>
>>66740928
>Halberd. Heavy
>Glaive. Heavy
>Pike. Heavy
>GWM: When you use a heavy weapon...
>"You can't use GWM on PAM"
...anon, I...
>>
>a fighter with the Dueling style will literally do less damage using a longsword with two hands than one
>a longsword used with one hand with Dueling deals more damage than when used with two hands with GWF
thanks wotc
>>
>>66740847
With that reasoning they should get up when you do
>>
>>66740971
>starting with 15 AC as a melee class with d8 HPs
At least rogue can free action disengage/dash. You can't even do that in the first level, and then it costs you ki, which is scarce and requires short rest to recover
>>
>>66740775
God I fucking hate Crawford.
>>
>>66740985
Stupid, but ingame balanced.
If you gave +2 to GWF everybody would use heavy weapons, which they already do because GWM.
>>
File: 1543436171921.jpg (136 KB, 734x1405)
136 KB
136 KB JPG
>>66740956
Monks hate him! Find out how this Paladin doubled his DPS with one easy trick!
>>
Gonna be playing at a table in a few hours that allows and features mystic, lore wizard, and revised artificer but bans monks because they're OP. Wish me luck.
>>
>>66741003
Dueling should also apply when you two-hand versatile weapons, sacrificing 2 AC for 1 damage is already a stupid idea without it also being sacrificing 2 AC so you can sacrifice 1 damage
>>
physically how do hobgoblins differ from regular ones?
>>
>>66741032
Have you tried looking at the pictures and statblocks yourself and discovering the answer for yourself?
>>
>>66741030
Play a Lore Wizard and throw out INT save Hold Persons, obviously. Or throws out 3d4+6d10+3 damage with two level 1 spell slots. And revised artificer isn't really op
>>
>>66740925
>Can't use GWM
>Can use SS though
>Can only make two attacks ranged and add 1d4 as bonus action so at best is 2d10+2xDex+1d4+20 = 43.5
Flurry unarmed is 4d10+20 = 42

What I'm missing here? +3 from ki? that's 49.5 average damage, you're still behind every other martial. Rogue deals like 68 easily, if he also uses GFW or BB it reaches way more...and that's literally the second worst damage dealer martial. You're way behind everybody, so I dunno why you laugh
>>
>>66741051
I don't think I'd consider revised artificer OP but I sure as heck would call it overloaded.
>>
File: Fighting Styles.pdf (2.28 MB, PDF)
2.28 MB
2.28 MB PDF
Here is the chad fighting styles.
>>
>>66741030
>but bans monks because they're OP
how in the fuck would anyone ever come to that conclusion?
>>
>>66739842
I preferred when dragonborns were just humans who devoted themselves to the dragons hard enough to undergo a transformation process.
>>
>>66741120
Apparently one of his former players completely shut down several of his encounters with one. Dunno the deets, I'm just along for the ride.
>>
>>66741120
trolled gently
>>
How wide do you make your dungeon corridors, /5eg/?
>>
I am experimenting with ways to gradually reveal dungeons to the players:
>Post-it notes cut out on rooms that I remove as they open doors
>Pros:
doesnt take long to prep, is quick at the table
>Cons:
it reveals room layouts before they open it
>cut rooms with scissor and glue it on a cardboard piece as they open doors
>Pros:
works really well in small room dungeons
Doesn't give away dungeon layout
>Cons:
wall thickness sometimes gives away secret doors
Takes a while to glue shit at the table
>just take a large paper and cover the dungeon with it and retract it as they explore
>pros:
0 prep needed
>cons:
Looks like shit
Only works in very simple linear dungeons without rooms

What do you guys do?
Ive considered using sand that I wipe off but id need to build a rig for it
>>
File: Fighting_Styles.pdf (653 KB, PDF)
653 KB
653 KB PDF
>>66741119
>A4
>2 MB
>>
>>66739842
don't lizards have plantigrade feet?
>>
>>66741150
was it stunning strike?
>>
>>66741181
Probably. Like I said I didn't ask for details and I wasn't planning on going monk, I just thought it was amusing. If he didn't like stunning strike he defo won't like >>66741051
>>
>>66741170
dragons everywhere are depicted with digitigrades. and this looks better
>>
>>66741030
This has to be bait
Those classes have way better stuff than stun

Fuck, mystic has save or die powers that don't need to hit, that's better than stun
>>
File: 20190613_150230.jpg (3.15 MB, 4128x3096)
3.15 MB
3.15 MB JPG
>>66741159
Here's an example of my post-it note setup for cragmaw castle in LMoP
>>
File: 1529671095760.jpg (195 KB, 1024x1365)
195 KB
195 KB JPG
What's the primary antagonist of your campaign?
>>
>>66741313
My dad.
>>
How do you make the barb unarmored defense worth it? You're almost always better off with half-plate.
>>
File: 20190613_150244.jpg (2.97 MB, 4128x3096)
2.97 MB
2.97 MB JPG
>>66741159
>>66741308
And here is my scissor and glue setup for redbrand hideout.
Don't mind the hallway glued on the wrong way, and the crosses and circles are because we already ran through it
>>
>>66741320
Y started with 19 Con 16 Dex 16 Str once. My AC was 17, I think I was better than half plate
>>
>>66741341
>bringing rolled stats to an argument
c'mon
>>
>>66741055
>Rogue deals like 68 easily
10d6 sneak attack
2d6+5 from two attacks
47 damage on average. How do they easily hit 68?
>>
So, I'm working on a Soul-Draining attack for a new enemy type. Tell me if this sounds any good;

Soul Siphon
Melee Weapon Attack, +5 to hit, reach 10ft, one creature. Hit: 2d8+2 necrotic damage, and the target's Constitution score is decreased by 1d4. The target dies if this reduces its Constitution to 0. Otherwise, the reduction lasts until the target finishes a long rest.

I was thinking of adding an Exhaustion level from a failed Con Save after a successful hit, but I figured that might be too much.
>>
>>66741159
I used the cutouts of individual rooms for a oneshot once but that was way too much work for me.
Now I have a big plastic sheet with a grid on it that I use with an erasable sharpie and just draw rooms as they go. sure, sometimes it takes a while to draw every room but during those times players just snack and chat
>>
>>66741357
>homebrew
It's shit. EVERYTHING you need to run your campaign is already available within the published materials. At most, all you need to do is refluff.
>>
>>66741357
>soul
<con
make that char and we have a deal
>>
>>66741350
Just wait till you rise your stats with ASI. You need Str, Dex and Con but unlike monk, who also needs 3 stats, you have d12 HPs and damage resistance
>>
>>66741391
Barbarians primarily want strength though. Monks actually want both dexterity and wisdom.
>>
>>66741384
Not sure what you mean, Anon. Please elaborate.
>>
>>66741353
SS
Also rogue has 6 ASI so you can even pick Xbow Xpert and deal 12d6+10+20 =72...not 68, thanks for correcting me

Or did you expect to use SS but not allow the rest to pick GWM or SS?
>>
>>66740315
>Use Minor Alchemy
Lmao no.

Transmitters are the worst wizard subclass. Even sorcerer's are better.
>>
>>66741425
Transmuters
>>
How do you guys handle the mechanics of spells and counterspell?

>DM: Lich casts X at Y level
>Player: I cast counterspell at Z level (potentially ability check)

>DM: Lich is starting to cast a spell
>Player: I cast counterspell at Z level
>DM: Sorry, lich's spell was higher level

Should players be able to identity the spell being cast before counterspelling? Would an Arcana check to identify a potential spell be too lenient or not enough?
>>
>>66741165
bad styles:
>dual shield gives you 1 AC but only if you use a really terrible weapon, defense gives you 1 AC and you can do whatever you want with your hands
>the original GWF is still a really mediocre damage boost and unless you're using a polearm you now have a better option
>halberdier is kind of situational and should include pikes
>pikes should either be allowed to use all of PAM's features or get their own fighting style
>the trident is still kind of bad, with just Refined Fighting it's worse than the longsword (thrown is too situational of a property) and with just Lancer it's worse than the spear because it doesn't work with PAM.
>how the fuck does refined fighting work? is the boost on top of your regular str/dex modifier? if so that's actually fucking broken. if it replaces it, what's the point of making them finesse if you're still gonna mostly use strength for the hit? plus it's still kind of broken, with 16 dex that's adding +2 to both accuracy and damage
>thrower is shit because object interaction rules still make being a dedicated thrower a terrible idea
>dual wielding is still shit
>>
>>66741418
Feats were a mistake
>>
>>66741418
I was just curious, I don't even know what the discussion was about. I thought SS wasn't used on rogues often considering how detrimental missing an attack is for them
>>
>>66741417
*cha
>>
>>66741504
Oh! Think Charisma represents the Soul more? I just assumed Soul = Vitality = Con.
>>
>>66741320
You go sword and board, ignore feats, wait until level 16 and hope that you have no magic armour that is better
>>
>>66741320
At level 20 it becomes better than non-magic armor :^)
>>
>>66741498
>how detrimental missing an attack is for them
They can sneak attack once per turn, so as long as they hit once they can add 10d6. Missing 1 attack is not as detrimental as missing an attack on a monk or a barbarian for example.

You go from dealing 12d6+10 to deal 11d6+5, that's why you pick xbow to have 2 ranged attacks, well and not have disadvantage on melee, and increase your chances.

As a rogue you also get advantage quite easily, not as easy as a barb though.
>>
>>66739904
Vengeance doesn't have to be. Conquest is pretty edgy so I can see that.
>>
>>66741437
>Should players be able to identity the spell being cast before counterspelling?
No
>Would an Arcana check to identify a potential spell be too lenient or not enough?
Even if you let the player use their reaction to make the arcana check to identify you get metagaming issues where the rogue with expertise in arcana will easily identify the spell being cast and now the lore bard knows whether to counterspell it or not.

Unfortunately, this also starts being a problem when you as the DM start giving monsters access to Counterspell and the roles are reversed - now the players either announce what they're casting and now you have to be careful to decide whether or not the monster who cannot know what spell the player is casting will counter it, or they just announce that they're casting any spell and you get bullshit like them totally intending to bait out the counterspell with a cantrip.
>>
>>66741130
Wouldn't the dragons find that shit to be nasty though? Imagine if your dog suddenly had human skin and a human head but stayed quadrupedal.
>>
>>66739904
Conquest directly tells you that murder is not the always the answer, so no.
>>
>>66740400
Dude I play the weebiest samurai ever and have taken samurai fighter and fluff it as using Fighting Spirit is the draw slash, which grants advantage. I.e strike so fast from the sheath it's easier to hit. Just fluff shit. You don't need to build all new stuff for your players. Ignore the mechanics and look at the narrative side. We've also got a ranger who uses a Naruto puppet thing as his attacks, but it's just a longbow.
>>
>>66741473
>dual shield gives you 1 AC but only if you use a really terrible weapon, defense gives you 1 AC and you can do whatever you want with your hands
It stacks with defense.
>the original GWF is still a really mediocre damage boost and unless you're using a polearm you now have a better option
agree
>halberdier is kind of situational and should include pikes
agree
>pikes should either be allowed to use all of PAM's features or get their own fighting style
agree
>the trident is still kind of bad
but at least has a reason to exist
>how the fuck does refined fighting work?
if you have 16 dex 16 str using a longsword
1d10 + 3(str) + 2(dex).
can be better than dueling, but you need to invest in an extra stat and by the point this is broken mages are bending reality so this boost is minimal also
>thrower is shit because object interaction rules still make being a dedicated thrower a terrible idea
And yet I've had 3 of them at my table. Granted 2 of them were kensei.
>dual wielding is still shit
agree, but dual wielding deserves to be shit
>>
>>66741677
>could refluff whichever class he wants mechanically
>picks ranger of all classes
>>
>>66740710
You can shove while grappling, to the same effect.
>>
>>66741678
>if you have 16 dex 16 str using a longsword
>1d10 + 3(str) + 2(dex).
>can be better than dueling, but you need to invest in an extra stat and by the point this is broken mages are bending reality so this boost is minimal also
sounds fine, but the added "finesse" made all of that a bit irritating to understand.
>>
>>66741678
>if you have 16 dex 16 str using a longsword
>1d10 + 3(str) + 2(dex).
>>66741473
Actually, it's even worse.
With 16/16 it's
>1d10 + 3 + 1 (3/2 = 1.5, rounded down).
Just for it to match dueling, you need 18 dex. It only becomes better than dueling with 20 dex.
>>
>>66741750
Yeah, but one is an attack and requires and check while one only costs half movement
>>
So my DM is super lax on homebrewed and UA stuff as long as it’s cool, so with that in mind, what’s a really fun setup if I’m starting at level 6?
>>
>>66741678
Dual Shield is still a terrible trap option even if you multiclass (variant rule) or play Champion because with just one pick of fighting style defense is strictly better and with multiple why are you playing a martial who uses a fucking d4 weapon that doesn't benefit from feats for just one extra AC? And in the same vein the trident might as well exist as a weapon for champions and weird multiclass abominations only.
>agree, but dual wielding deserves to be shit
This is the intra-martial equivalent of a 3.5 cleric player looking at the 3.5 fighter and saying it deserves to be shit. Either make dual wielding not terrible or don't let players use it.
>>66741766
Oh, I missed that it rounds down. That said, it increases both accuracy and damage unlike dueling.
>>
>>66741313
Currently, a crime lord. Leading to a king. Then a god. It's a jrpg progression which the party are all obsessed with so I embraced it.
>>
>>66741814
You are right about dual shields.
But
I don't believe anyone going with dual shields cares about any of that shit. They clearly just want to dual wield shields.
>>
What’s a fun/creative idea for a evil campaign?
>>
>>66741812
Mystic. You get to do everything.
>>
>>66741856
There's nothing stopping them from taking the tavern brawler feat and using the shield as an improvized d4 weapon.
>>
>>66741869
game of lair monopoly.
>>
>>66741577
My DM is a cunt about this and good fucking god does he get sour when I then counter his counterspell and have to roll for it and win. Also fucks me off because he clearly doesn't limit enemy spell slots, just uses as many as he likes.
>>
How do you make/play an evil pc without being a murderhobo/generally uncreative dickhead? Like if I was playing a crafty and sneaky dickhead it’d probably be fine.
>>
>>66741710
You can refluff anything if you try. Ranger has lots of options, and sure most are shit, but they work well enough.
>>
>>66741920
step 1: have idea for evil character that isn't a dickhead
step 2: play that character
>>
R8 my fighting style

Bully
You gain a +3 bonus to damage rolls you make against grappled, incapacitated, paralyzed, prone or restrained targets.
>>
For each class, what are considered the good/evil subclasses for them? Like I know that you could run any matchup with any alignment but it seems that some fits better than others in this regard
>>
>>66741963
the only outright evil subclasses in the game are oathbreaker and death cleric and technically speaking players shouldn't even know they exist
>>
>>66741980
theres nothing outright evil about death clerics
>>
How many variants of rangers are ther so far? PHB Ranger, spellless Ranger, Xanthar's guide Ranger, anything else?
>>
>>66741994
xanax only gives subclasses for the phb ranger. mearls has another rerevised ranger or at least started with it
>>
>>66741959
I think dueling would still be better because it has 100% uptime
>>
>>66741994
Right now there is PHB, Spell-less and Revised. PHB is official, spell-less was less an option and more an example of making something spell-less, and revised is forever UA
>>
>>66741963
Barbarian: Zealot (Necrotic damage)
Bard: Whispers
Cleric: Death
Druid: Spore
Fighter: Champion
Monk: Long Death probably
Paladin: Oathbreaker, Conquest and Treachery
Ranger: N/A
Rogue: Assassin I guess
Sorcerer: Shadow
Warlock: Any really, but Undying, GOO and Fiend
Wizard: Necromancy

not that any (except probably Oathbreaker) have to be evil
>>
>>66740481
Tell him to roll up a Kensai/Champion 3. Dueling fighting style for +2 damage with a longsword, and Crit fishing to max out your deft strike mini smites that adds your unarmed damage to the weapon strike in between your stunning blows. Plus an action surge.

If he's Half-Orc, he gets to add another weapon damage on crits.
>>
>>66741920
Lawful Evil. Be a dick to NPCs, just don't murderhobo them.
>goblins are attacking our farm!
>fuck your farm, whatll you pay us to clear them out
Ultimately you still go on the adventure, you just get to be a prick to NPCs beforehand.
>>
>>66741920
You can just be a bad person. Do evil things that aren't murderrhobo. Desecrate or be irreverant towards good, bend rules, put yourself or your mission at #1 priority at the expense of others.
>>
>>66741920
Being evil doesn't mean being a dick. It just means your interests come first. If playing nice to get some pig fucked farmer to trust you for the night with his hucow daughter tending to your every need, then you play nice.

Even chaotic evil isn't about brutal murder if every npc. Just those who would be a hindrance.

It's far more sinister to gain someone's tryst before you stab them in the back at their most vulnerable because they were in the way.
>>
>>66739842
Oath of Conquest is a great filter for figuring out which of your players has a small penis.
>>
Would it be too broken to give barb and kensei some fighting styles?
>>
>>66742181
why would barb need a fighting style?

no, they can always put a dip into fighter
>>
>>66742181
No more than a level 1 fighter dip, and honestly that will probably give you more than simply adding a couple fighting styles to BBN/MNK.
>>
>>66742181
barbarians don't have fighting styles because they rack disciprine
kensai already
>>
>>66742181
TWF is useless on monk
GWF can't be used on monk
Armor can't be used on monk
So only archery or duelist
>>
>>66742242
is a fighting style
>>
>>66742210
They don't, but let's say I want to give them one.
On a scale of ranger to wizard, how overpowered would it be?
>>
>>66742256
>GWF can't be used on monk
You can use a versatile weapon and benefit from GWF.
>>
>>66742265
For barb? none
The most powerful is Archery, and barb aren't good archers. The rest are meh.

For kensai? normally I would say no because Archery...but kensai doesn't deal much damage so +2 to hit won't be a problem

So imo, I don't think it would be a problem unless I'm missing some hidden combos
>>
is sun soul any fun?
>>
>>66742299
True, dunno why I thought it was heavy only for a second, anyway GWF is not great (ironically), and works better on 2d6 weapons which monk doesn't have access to, so I don't think it will be a problem
>>
>>66742265
not particularly
>>
>>66739937
Because paladins used to be gated behind restrictions, human only, 17 charisma, lawful good, code of conduct. So they could do more than other classes, it was a privilege to play as one.
then babies complained and the restrictions were lessened, but the extra abilities remained.
>>
>>66742265
>>66742181
>barb and kensei
why stop there? give bladelocks some too. and tempest/war clerics or spore druids
>>
>>66739971
increase breath weapon from 1 per SR to prof bonus per short rest
>>
>>66742315
I played Scourge Aasimar Sun Soul Monk and Warforged Sun Soul Monk like a year and a half ago.
They were fun, I had a blast with them, but I suffered a lot, and they aren't good with capital letters, they get the job done but they aren't great or powerful.
>>
>>66742342
i'm more fun than optimal anyway
>>
>>66742315
not really...
Unless you want to be vegeta

The problem is that you are doing what monk isn't designed to do instead of just rolling a sorcerer/warlock.
My only recommendation for Sunsoul monk is when the DM hates you and refuses to engage you in melee and at that point why even play.
>>
What's a good build for blaster cleric? I haven't played cleric in this edition and want to give it a shot.

Campaign I'm playing in has no proper magic users, my bard got royally fucked up. We have, battlemaster-fighter, thief-rogue and some melee focused warlock who doesn't have eldritch blast (mostly uses shield for her spells).
>>
>>66742359
You're picking monk, we already assume you aren't into optimal.
>>
>>66742339
that doesnt do anything. the issue with breath weapon is that it's too shit to use it over anything else. making it more spammable doesnt help with that.
>>
>>66742361
Sun soul is not entirely ranged though. You can attack twice and then burning hands, and for that you want to be in melee, with as many enemies as possible in front of you.
>>
>>66741051
lore wiz/dragon sorc/celestial warlock spam MM for 1d4+1+x2 cha each
>>
>>66742379
fair enough

i did make a kobold monk for AL and the first go around was actually pretty fun. advantage on every attack and sunlight sensitivity never came up even once
>>
>>66741313
Apparently it's Orcus which is kind of boring
>>
>>66742375
>burning warlock spell slots on shield
it hurts

light is awesome and blasty with fireball. tempest is great too, but the lvl8 feature is probably somewhat wasted if you want to stay on the casty side of the class. but aksing your DM to switch divine strike for potent spellcasting shouldnt be a big deal
>>
>>66742315
They are fun but not the best archetype for monk.
>>
>>66742375
>blaster cleric
Just play Light or Tempest, you won't need to think too hard about it.
>>
>>66742336
Do they even need it?
>>
>>66742375
Just take the Light domain. It gives you Potent Cantrip and Fireball, which is really all you need.
>>
>>66742336
>spore druids

...why?
>>
>>66742375
light is probably the best ranged blaster cleric, tempest is best melee blaster
>>
File: 1473524267160.gif (136 KB, 500x500)
136 KB
136 KB GIF
>>66742396
arranging foes in a cone isn't that easy.
If you want to sweep many people as possible, the drunken master is the way to go since you can position very easily for your flurries.

anyway, play what you want to play. I'm not trying to shit on your fun. If you want to DBZ or Street Fighter sun soul is fine. If you want to do anything else, other monk options are superior.
>>
>>66742409
>kobold
Fuck off with that race, pack tactics is absurdly broken on a PC
>>
>>66742427
Tempest is an awkward combination of spell-focused and melee-focus. Most of its abilities relate to damage spells, but it gets Divine Strike instead of Potent Cantrip.
>>
>>66742429
kensei does.
it's both a boring class and by the end of it, the entire point of the class disappears as your martial arts dice matches/beats your weapons
>>
>>66742459
at the cost of -2 str and sunlight sensitivity
>>
>>66742453
I wasn't the anon who asked for sun soul, I'm the anon who played the aasimar and the warforged one.
Also I had mobility, which already gives me anything good from drunk master.
>>
>>66742421
>but the lvl8 feature is probably somewhat wasted if you want to stay on the casty side of the class.

You can always stack it with booming blade and be both hitty and casty.
>>
>>66742443
with the poison damage bonus to melee weapon attacks it kinda seems to me as if they wanted it to be a melee-non-wildshape spec. but yeah, not that good a reason.

>>66742429
about as much as barb, i guess. so not at all
>>
>>66741313
Depends what level you look at it at. Our campaign is made up of 4.5 stages, with each having its own villains, but with one overarching villain, who's also the antagonist of the last couple of stages.

In the current one, the party thought it was the wizard who invented Warforged in their world and who locked himself in a tower for 5000 years. Over time they came to realise that his tower was a weapon to fight the overarching villain, at the cost of committing genocide of everything apart from Warforged. Then they got to him to find him dead, and found out that his wife had been manipulating them into unlocking the path to him all along so she could kill him and steal the tower's power for herself.
>>
>>66742471
Woah, -2 Str on a monk, such a loss.
Woah, sunlight sensitivity, only when you're directly under the sunlight...so pretty much never. No inside houses, not in a forest, not even on a town. As long you avoid deserts or plains, everything is fine.

And even so, pack tactics canecls sunlight sensitivity and in that case you're like verybody else. So a penality almost never and an absurd advantage pretty much always.
>>
>>66742459
it just balances out sunlight sensitivity.

>>66742471
noone cares about -2 str
>>
>>66739868
>>66739937
This. Don't forget that even their non-burst damage is almost as good as a barbarian or fighter's. Heck, they get +1d8 to all their attacks at level 11 which works great with polearm master.
The +CHA to saves aura is probably one of the craziest things they get aside from all that bullshit they get
Paladins are easy to play yet also powerful, I'd argue if you didn't have a paladin on your team you'd need one more than some meme caster.

They're somewhat kept in check by their MADness, but it isn't enough, especially when faggots roll stats and make them even more powerful or multiclass hexblade or some shit.
>>
>>66742375
Light Cleric give you fireball and potent spell casting. Maybe magic initiate into some of the Druid spell for some attack roll cantrip (thematically produce flame work but it won't work with your potent spell casting).

Just keep flinging spell and attack with spiritual weapon.
>>
>>66742512
>Woah, -2 Str on a monk, such a loss.
it's a loss on any non-caster as they still need to move on foot
>>
>>66742486
yeah, of course thats what im doing rn

but they were asking for a blasty cleric. i dont know if they want melee stuff
>>
>>66742504
I mean I'm a bit more reluctant to give fighting styles to casters. I've never had a druid at my table because all my friends hate druids so I don't even know if the class is strong or weak.
>>
>>66742466
I mean, Light is probably the better overall blaster but Destructive Wrath is a lot of fun and heavy armor proficiency is nice on any class. A bigger problem with the class is a distinct lack of lightning damage to with the Thunderbolt Strike feature.
>>
>>66742512
>>66742520
eh you're probably right but i don't really care about being optimal i just wanted to play something that seemed fun
>>66742524
i think you're confusing STR and DEX
>>
>>66741437
I fucking hate counterspell and how it's designed to work. It's all resource management and no element of chance.

I instituted a rule of "counterspell starts a contest between the casters using your spellcasting ability, with +2 to your roll for each slot higher than the spell that you cast".

Otherwise you get have to start getting seriously smart with your casters to avoid them getting locked down the entire time.
>>
>>66741869
You have to track down the Antichrist and steal his power.
>>
>>66742540
it was just shittalking. spores druid is a mess anyway and it's best to just play it as a darker casty druid, say thank you for all the temp hp and ignore that poison damage.

casters would just pick the free AC anyway.
>>
>>66742569
picking the right spell level is the element of chance
>>
>>66742512
>>66742552
Strength is pretty good on a monk just because monks are in a great position to grapple.
>Free hands
>Melee
>Attacks are weak but makes several attacks
>Good movement, especially for dragging people or getting to just where you need to be for it
>Can use shoves/grapples to disengage without having to spend ki or do something like stun etc, on a skirmishing class that doesn't get free disengages
Monks honestly should be using grapples more than a strength fighter does. You probably want 10 or 12 strength for it, though if you can.
Also kobolds are small, which prevents you from shoving/grappling large creatures, I believe.
>>
>>66742375
Arcana cleric from SCAG would probably be the best "blaster" at level 17 as you will be a WISard. You get a couple wizard cantrips at early level, learns magic missiles, etc. I would say that Arcana cleric would be best for a campaign that has no full casters, as you can get a 9th level spell from the wizard list in addition to your 9th level cleric spells.
Light cleric or a martial domain cleric will come online earlier of course.
>>
>>66742522
>Maybe magic initiate into some of the Druid spell for some attack roll cantrip (thematically produce flame work but it won't work with your potent spell casting).
potent spellcasting doesnt give a shit about attack roles, it just requires a damage dealing cantrip. would be pretty weird ot have a feature on half the subclasses that cant be used without multiclassing/magic initiate
>>
>>66742611
most game never reach level 17 and even if they do that's like the last 5% of the campaign.

That's not fun.
>>
>>66742385
yes it does, it starts strong and ends up a little weaker than a regular weapon attack. If you can hit 2 enemies with it your better off using your breath rather than attack action. Plus it fills a nice in martial classes that (other than hunter) have a lack of AoE, especially at higher levels.

like 4 attacks with great sword is ~48 dmg
breath weapon at that level vs 3 opponents ~52dmg

through GWM and greatsword jumps to 88, add an extra enemy into the breath weapon and it hits 70.

The breath weapon is a tactical weapon, not a general purpose one. Giving more uses encourages it to be used when the opportunity arises, rather than hold it for the perfect chance
>>
>>66741920
My favourite character was a neutral evil drow. He was actually comparatively friendly and ended up being the face of the party (because Charisma Rogue and I'm naturally talkative).

He rarely actually murdered anyone, and most of his time was spent working towards the party's benefit, except:
>tried to sponsor a coup in a city whose religious leader ran contrary to his own (Vhaeraun to his Lolth)
>killed off another party member for a boost to his own power it was fine with the player OOCly, our DM was an utter shitter and he wanted out
>found out that his former lieutenant in the criminal enforcer group was the one who betrayed him, and murdered him in revenge
>launched a full-scale plot, with the help of the party, whom he persuaded/conned/blackmailed into helping him, to kill an allied vampire, lie to his wife about who did it so she would confront another vampire, then blow them both up while they're in the same space, so he could take control over a silver mine and the criminal group that exiled him

Shit was cash. He never inconvenienced the party or became a murderhobo - he actively ran from fights - he was just out for himself.
>>
>>66742633
I meant potent spellcasting wouldn't work with Magic Initiate Druid since it isn't a Cleric spell.
>>
>>66742569
If your players are too counterspell happy just waste their spell slots on countering level 1 spells and laugh behind the screen.
>>
>think Ancient paladins are fucked up fey pagan shit knights who borderline on evil
>it's some gay light unicorn shit

What the hell? Anyone has a decent fey paladin homebrew for my chaotic neutral paladin?
>>
>>66742605
Depends on how you implement it.
>roll to identify, no reaction needed
Any wizard caster and probably a bard caster have +10 Arcana before too long, making DCs almost irrelevant.
>roll to identify, reaction needed
Means two people burn their reaction but it'd piss off your players, guaranteed.
>>
>>66742670
>chaotic neutral
You don't deserve nice things.
>>
>>66742694
or don't let them identify and allow them to take that chance at their own perogative
>>
>>66742705
It's an evil campaign tho.
>>
>>66742694
I've toyed with this. I've set the DC to be 10 + caster level so as to prevent meta gaming based off DC
>>
>>66742569
and yet fog cloud can prevent casting of even level 9 spells and nobody complains about that
>>
>>66742670
>waaah im too fucking retarded to rewrite oath tenets and other fluff
>also edgy bullshit
i cant help you, anon
>>
>>66742721
>Metagaming based off DC
So, what, you allow a player to say 'oh, that DC is too high or too low, I'm not going to counterspell'?
>>
>>66742720
Then be the best evil. Lawful Evil.
>>
>>66742633
this is right >>66742656
it has to be a cleric spell. the only way they do that is being arcane. natures doesnt even say its a cleric one
>>
>>66742769
Can I be lawful evil while being the reincarnation of a forest spirit that has taste for human flesh?
>>
>>66742782
yeah i just misread that post.

tho i wouldnt take magic initiate just to get some attack roll cantrip
>>
If you hate counterspell so much don't just nerf it, it's already situational as is

Just have spellcasters be smart and actually avoid being in a spot where counterspell can be cast on them
or accept that maybe your super big single enemy can't always cast every spell without problems and have more than one railroad plan
>>
Is there an Arcane cleric domain?
>>
>>66742744
Well if I did identify is 10+spell level, and you roll a 15, then the player will think, "hmmm, i missed the check so I better counterspell"
>>
File: 1551547750070.jpg (89 KB, 1252x746)
89 KB
89 KB JPG
>>66742809
looking on 5etools is too hard or what?
>>
What’s the best fuckaround bard subclass? Like the DM had killed my last character to be a dick so now I figured I might as well as not take this current campaign seriously anymore until our regular dm is in charge again
>>
>>66742800
oh yeah, taking MI as a cleric is a great thing, its usually just melee ones that benefit the most. i'd love it even more if it applied to every one they know, but sadly its a rip off
>>
>>66742814
Oh, right, this is about arcana, sorry.

I'd say just players not knowing is plenty enough of a nerf to counterspell.
>>
>>66742809
It's in SCAG
>>
>>66742821
swords, or if it is a high level game valor and use magical secrets to pretend to be a paladin or ranger
>>
>>66742821
Depends what you mean by fuckaround. Also depends on level
>>
>>66742827
MI is always a great thing, no matter the class. so many cool and flavourful cantrips and spells to pick up
>>
>>66742841
>>66742845
It’s a level 6 campaign that at the very moment is just a oneshot. I’m torn between playing a memebuild or playing a character who has a lot of power out of combat in terms of what they can do
>>
>>66742552
str determines jumps and climbs. anyone who's not flying will need to care about such things
>>
>>66742832
I'll be honest i started using it just so I had a hard fall back to rule on whether an NPC attempts a counterspell, my PC have an itchy trigger finger and usually try to counterspell without checking anyways
>>
Cannibal
Due to twisted origins or being raised in a cannibalistic culture, you have a taste for human flesh, devouring your foes to steal their vitality.
• You can devour the guts of fresh humanoid corpses. Upon doing so, you choose to either heal Hit Points equal to your hit die + your Constitution modifier, or regain one of your hit dices.
• You are immune to disease and have advantage on saving throws against poison

Opinions on this feat?
>>
>>66742872
*it was a oneshot, he decided to keep going for some reason
>>
>>66742821
lore is so fucking good with cutting words and lvl6 mag secrets.
>>
File: hfgrq1P.png (50 KB, 306x284)
50 KB
50 KB PNG
>>66742883
>Introduce gnome who has the habit of making everything he does sound extravagant and incredible
>"I will show you a spell that mortal men and women have yet to even bear witness to, one that would make the king of devils buckle his knees and fall from his throne!"
>It's a level 1 spell
>They counterspell it
>>
>>66742885
I'd change it to immunity to non-magical diseases, being a filthy savage shouldn't protect you from mummy-rot or vrock spores
>>
>>66742885
why the guts of all things? not touching the rest of it seems wasteful
>>
>>66742800
Sacred Flame and Toll the dead won't cover every enemy. For example, Erinyes has high DEX and WIS save.

Not being helpless if you are force into melee via Shillelagh is nice too.
>>
>>66742913
Tasha's hideous laughter?
>>
>>66742915
Good point.

>>66742917
Vitality is in the guts.
>>
>>66742841
>>66742821
This. Sword Bard can grab Find Greater Steed and Banishing Smite before Paladin can.
>>
>>66742707
Think they'd be even more pissed off with that, to be honest.

This is why I hate counterspell - the way it works at current is bad, because of the reasons already mentioned. But changing it to any other form will still piss off your players.

>>66742805
>your super big single enemy can't always cast every spell without problems and have more than one railroad plan

I got pissed off with counterspell at the point where my 12th level party with a wizard and a bard were counterspelling everything that came up, such that I had to have at least two enemy casters in every battle just to counterbalance.

Resource lockdown is all well and good for single dungeons, but when you have a party moving through the world, it becomes inordinately hard to justify their inability to take a long rest after most fights, so they often entered fights with full slots, then I had to watch for careful positioning of the NPC casters to avoid them getting counterspelled, and the wizard would just teleport around to ensure they could always counterspell.

It's doable, balance-wise, but when your wizard has genuine autism, will calculate all the odds between turns, then permalock your casters down so every fight is either a curbstomp or takes 8 hours to resolve, you can get a bit tired of the mechanics.

The counterspell contest made it a lot more variable and took a lot of work off me as a DM. I'm not a tactical genius.
>>
>>66742873
well i did put the 12 into STR and proficiencied athletics so i didn't entirely ignore it because 6 STR would be absolutely awful
>>
>>66742930
just ban it if all else fails
>>
>>66742930
It sounds like you have a far bigger problem than counterspell.

Don't be defeatist and say 'no, the players can just teleport anywhere and always get long rests'. You need to really instill some time pressure in the game so people don't walk over you like a doormat. It's no wonder you're having problems if you have high level spellcasters who always have their slots.
That said, for a newer DM it's pretty understandable because the book hardly drives home the importance of putting some sort of pressure on the party of some kind to prevent them from fucking around.
>>
>>66742873
monks run up walls, anon, and can spend 1 ki to jump twice what they normally can, which won't be much but makes up for the -2 str. So literally no penalty
>>
>>66741519
I think vitality is more bodily strength and stamina (str/con) and soul must be cha or wis while mind is int.
>>
For a one/twoshot that starts at level 6, what Sorcerer would be the most fun?
>>
>>66742872
embrace the memery. get your hands on ranged weapon proficiencies somehow (elf, half elf or whatever), grab swift quiver and find greater stead and become a better ranger than a ranger
>>
>>66742930
Add more minion so the wizard has to use their reaction for shield for die.
>>
Paladin wants to be a holy archer and smite with longbow.

Yes or no?
>>
>>66742977
you get wall run at later level and spending ki to just move around is awful.

Also doubling a low number still gets you a low number. All I'm saying is that you shouldn't make it a dump stat.
>>
>>66742969
It's less of a problem now. This was last year - we had a massive schism in the group over a break-up and the wizard and bard left, and we essentially started over on a new campaign.

Still - the experience really soured my experience of counterspell in particular, and I've always held the contest rule in place since then. My players grumble occasionally, but I give them a lot of leeway in other places, so I think they take it as DM fiat.

In terms of putting pressure on the party, I still don't know how you're supposed to do it outside of dungeons. Sure, I can throw fights at them while they're travelling around, but I don't like loading more than 1-2 combats per session, and I'm unclear of what other renewable sources of spell slot drain there are.
>>
>>66743039
RAW no, Smites have to use melee weapons. Celestial Warlock with a Long Bow Pact Weapon can be a Holy Archer though.
>>
>>66743016
draconic
grab a dagger and go ham with gfb
>>
>>66743046
10 Str (12-2) allows you to jump 10, by spending ki, 20. 20 is the top anybody can reach except monk because you jump your Str and stats are capped at 20. So you won't have a problem there, unless you consider a problem not being slightly above the rest.

And you get running up walls by the time casters can cast fly without gimping themselves over not having enough spell slots.

Does it suck wasting ki over that? yes. But a -1 to climb and -2 ft to jump is not going to fuck you over AT ALL. So no, on monk is literally a non issue.
>>
>>66743039
RAI no, RAW no. And there's actually a reason.
https://www.sageadvice.eu/2018/06/07/why-paladins-can-only-smite-on-melee-attacks-and-not-ranged/

Paladin is already the strongest class in the game as argued earlier but one of its weaknesses is the fact it's not really good at ranged combat.
Ranged combat is basically an upgrade of melee combat.

Now, if you don't allow the player to take feats like crossbow expert, I'd say it's not really too big a deal and it's not like paladin can get archery anyway without multiclassing, so as long as they aren't doing dumb shit like multiclassing for archery as well then honestly I guess I'd say it's perfectly fine, even if it goes against the flavour a bit. I mean, flavour exists to be refluffed.
>>
For a Warforged Druid, would it be cool to reflavor the metal as wood? Or reflavor my wild shapes as if I transform into robotic forms of the animals in question?
>>
>>66743103
Also here's a fun bit:
https://www.sageadvice.eu/2017/11/06/is-there-a-game-balance-reason-paladins-dont-have-archery-style-ranged-smite/

When asked about 'is there a design reason you don't smite with ranged attacks' Mearls just says 'because you don't lol' and 'yeah it'd be totally balanced to smite with ranged weapons'

At least Jeremy has his head screwed on right and actually read the fucking book.
>>
>>66743113
You aren't the first anon who did the Beastwars approach on Druid, anon
>>
>>66743016
>>66743085
go mountain dwarf, get that medium armor and battle axe for your GFB
>>
>>66743096
where does a monk get to run up walls?
>>
>>66743143
I figured, but I’m glad it’s still cool
>>
Ever since I started playing D&D I've almost entirely lost interest in playing video games and almost exclusively want to play D&D but can only play one session a week.
>>
>>66743151
9th level, unarmoured movement.
>>
>>66743120
Mearls doesn't read the book but allows a lot of stuff that won't be broken and just fun

Crawford is a faggot who says no to non broken/powerful stuff (or even rather weak) because "not in muh rulebook"

They're both faggots, but I hate Crawford more because he goes against any sense or logic because muh RAW
>>
>>66743177
But it requires ki
>>
>>66743174
Find ways to open up your schedule, anon.
>>
>>66743148
>being more MAD and getting stealth disadvantage for +3 damage per attack
you'd be better off going v. human weapon master for rapier proficiency
>>
How ABI hungry is Druid? Does it change depending on circle?
>>
>>66743174
thats what happens when you taste the fruit of freedom.
get another group to scratch the itch.

and hope for baldurs gate 3 to be good
>>
>>66743177
that's cool

i just liked the idea of a diminutive little kobold punching the shit out of a guy or just straight up choking a bitch out
>>
>>66743179
i mainly hate crawford cause hes just another elf wizard lover with no reservations about leaving other classes and races in the dirt.

and especially for what they did to warlock, leaving the class in such a fucking mess
>>
>>66743179
Crawford has consistency (inb4 'but there are those times where one of the hundreds of people he has to respond to while he's on a train somewhere and he gives a slightly wrong answer!' Better than Mearls at least, and probably better than most people who haven't read the book.).

Mearls just pulls shit out of his ass 'because it sounds cool' which is exactly the wrong way to go about having a rules system where you don't even seem to know what your own rules are.
>>
>>66743197
I have a weird schedule and only have Monday/Wednesdays off work so not a lot of people in my area play. I've only played about 10 sessions but I'm considering DMing a noob campaign just to see if I can get a group.
>>
>>66743148
>>66743085
why not elf? shortsword or rapier should be good enough. and no need for medium armour with dragon skin and shield spell
>>
>>66743203
>ABI
You mean ASI?
Not much, Moon is probably the more SAD. But not a single Druid is MAD as far as I know, at least not compared to actual MAD concepts like Monk, Unarmored Barbarian, etc
>>
File: ww5655.gif (3.71 MB, 320x179)
3.71 MB
3.71 MB GIF
>>66743227
Getting some DM experience under your belt is always good. Good luck with that, anon.
>>
>>66743203
Moon is the go-to for rollfags if all of their stats suck. the rest is just default caster. WIS mainstat and some dex/con doesnt hurt.
>>
>>66743243
you don't get rapier proficiency as an elf
half-elf gives you the best stats and v. human gets you rapier prof.
>>
>>66743179
>he goes against any sense or logic because muh RAW
Like how your hand suddenly gets teleported to another dimension and becomes unusable the moment you grab a shield? Unless you're Cleric, Paladin or Druid of course. Or like you suddenly forget how to martial artist the moment you touch a non monk weapon? not weilding, just fucking touching/holding it. Yeah, fuck both, but fuck Crawford specially, such a fucking casterfaggot.
>>
>>66743195
Where does it say that in the handbook?
>>
Caster bros, does your hair pull a Ghibli when your character gets angry?
>>
>>66743294
drow get rapier, shortsword, light xbow.

but shortsword for regular (half)elves should be good enough. as long as it's something finesse, it's good. i really wouldnt waste a feat on it.
>>
>>66743325
gay
>>
>>66743325
Nausicaa isn't a caster though.
>>
>>66743203
Moon druids are probably the least stat dependent in the game.
Non-moon druids don't depend much either.

Pick spells that don't use your spellcasting mod so much and you'll be fine.
Regardless, you get shield+med armor and 1d8 hitdie instead of 1d6 or something and whatever the heck.
>>
>>66743368
You right. Does your character's hair decide to pull a Ghibli when they get emotional?
>>
>>66743226
>Crawford has consistency
>shield master is now a finishing move for reasons
Nice try to deflect any criticism where he suddenly flip flops as "he's on a train somewhere", you're a bigger faggot than he is.
>>
>>66743463
>I am absolutely flawless and will never ever make a ruling slightly wrong on an already grey area
Sure thing, Mr. Perfect, living in your Perfect world.

You can say what you want, but there's no way he's even close to Mearls' level of a lack of caring about anything but money.
>>
File: 1553875491700.jpg (16 KB, 277x325)
16 KB
16 KB JPG
>>66743179
>>66743300
I mean, if you are gonna be the rules guy, you are gonna be the rules guy.

He answers the question to how the rules are written and the rules are written that way.
>>
>>66743443
Ashitaka isn't a caster either, if anything he's the shit mid to high level martials should be pulling off.
>>
>>66743480
>When called out on being a faggot suddenly shifts goal posts
Like fucking clockwork, they're both garbage in their own way and should be disregarded on any ruling.
>>
>>66743485
Except when they're not and he changes them...which always seem to benefit the classes he wants them to benefit.
>>
>>66743514
I'm saying the exact same thing before and suddenly it's 'shifting goalposts'?
>>
>>66743480
t. crawford
>>
>>66743489
It does not matter if your a caster.
>>
>T. martials STILL assblasted about the fact they might have to actually use their feats to HELP THE TEAM instead of doing nothing but racing damage with each other
Oh woe is me
>>
>>66743520
Yeah your message about Mearls is the same but where's your dick riding arguing that Crawford is infallible, except those times where he said one thing then decided to change that completely.
>>
File: Sharpshooter.gif (966 KB, 500x281)
966 KB
966 KB GIF
>>66743489
>if anything he's the shit mid to high level martials should be pulling off
You can kinda do this as a Battle Master with Sharpshooter and a critical hit. It would be better if there was a maneuver that functioned like Brutal Critical, but what we have is good enough.
>>
>>66743532
The question was specifically for casters though?
>>
>>66743535
racing damage is the way to help the team, dumbass
>>
>>66743556
>>66743556
>>66743556
>>
>>66743557
Not anymore.
>>
>>66743563
>no edition
>shit tq
>page 7
When will you stop you shitposting crusade?
>>
>>66743545
That's the point of the original post, though. Not everybody is going to make perfect rulings when forced to answer 100s of people who can't even be assed to read the book every day.

>Design a feat that allows you to use a shield for a supportive capability
>Decide that just allowing you to use the feat to use bonus actions whenever even when doing other things might be a bit much, it should be an extension of your attacks, but probably not spammed every single time before you take the attack action - it should be a choice, because that's more fun
>Add the caveat, then, that you have to take the attack action

>Be some other time
>Someone asks about bonus actions
>Yeah sure bonus actions are supposed to be used whenever really it's not like they have a specific timing

>Realize you fucked up
>Realize you need to go back and correct that the RAI on shield master is actually that, yes, indeed, you have to take the attack action in order to use shield master's bonus action (Wow! Who would have thought?!)

and then people got pissed because their option wasn't munchkin enough.
I'd still play a shield master because I don't enjoy GWM/PAM gameplay, and likewise I don't care about trying to shove people on the floor to repeatedly stab them with my sunsword or whatever.
>>
>>66743614
Never.
>>
>>66743648
>muchking
>shield master
Anon, I...
People just don't deviate from SS, PAM, XX and GWM, that ruling only made people double down in those feats.
>>
>>66743665
You're comparing everything to GWM/PAM/etc.
Ever thought the original design was that feats weren't supposed to be feat taxes?
That shield master is designed to be balanced, not competitive with all that GWMPAM crap?

He's not trying to retroactively fix anything, he's just conveying the design intent behind something. If you think the game design is flawed (which, naturally, it is) you're free to homebrew it, but the game designer isn't there to continuously scrap the book they made and published and you now own because it's some constantly evolving competitive MMORPG. It's D&D.
>>
>>66743702
>You're comparing everything to GWM/PAM/etc.
Why shouldn't he compare them? feats should be equally useful/powerful. Even as it was used before Shield Master wasn't a damage spike
>>
>>66743648
>Bonus actions can be used any time
>Except in this case for reasons and it's all because of inconsistency
How much do you get paid or do you do it for free hoping he'll pound you?
>>
>>66743754
Shield master is still
>Bonus to dex saves
>A mini-evasion feature
>A bonus action special attack you can use every turn if you're attacking

You don't compare to GWM/PAM because while that is the meta, it wasn't the original game design and it's not really how they're designing the game now either. When they made an UA for extra feats, all those feats were probably weaker than shield master is now, actually. They were okay, usable, but complete shit compared to GWM/PAM/etc.

Yes, they fucked up, but at least JC isn't damage controlling and turning 5e on its head in his tweets to redesign the game.
>>
>>66743754
>feats should be equally useful/powerful
not really? Sure, there's something to be balanced, as in there shouldn't be ivory tower design where something is a strictly a better version of another thing, but it's really apples and oranges. Feats are mostly options for specialization in 5e, it's not a common destination arms race.
>>
>>66743648
>need to go back and correct
>Implying there was anything to actually correct
>>
>>66743775
Shield master is intended to be one of those times where there is a condition you need to fulfill for a bonus action, but people started to say 'well technically if I take the attack action in the future I can use the bonus action now before fulfilling the conditions, right?'
>>
File: 1456958920439.jpg (115 KB, 413x395)
115 KB
115 KB JPG
>>66743791
>It wasn't the original game design
>They haven't bothered fixing it but knocking people on their ass when you feel like it is a no no
Holy shit do you bother reading what you type?
>>
>>66743839
There's nothing to fix with sharpshooter/GWM/etc.
It's working, mechanically, as intended. It just turns out to be too strong, and/or required for martials to keep up in game balance because they also might have fucked up caster/martial shit.

Fixing isn't about rebalancing the game, it's about making sure the rules as intended are portrayed by the rules.
>>
>>66743227
Have you tried playing online?
>>
I mean, they nerfed WOT4E monk after release with an errata.
At least they're consistent even if they're just unbalancing the game further.
>>
>>66743866
>and/or required for martials to keep up in game balance
This is such a lie, not all martials can use SS,GWM and PAM
>>
File: 1528483967223.png (566 KB, 905x619)
566 KB
566 KB PNG
>>66743866
>N-n-no I don't mean it was the original game design
>Just that it was and that's why they haven't fixed it
>Outright admits Martials having another on demand way to compete isn't bad with might have fucked up balance
Also if the rules are as intended then the bonus action can be taken anywhere or it can't.
>>
>>66743939
The only martials that don't really want SS/PAM/GWM/CBE are barbarogues and monks.
>>
>>66743809
Oh yeah why did they, maybe because Crawford said they could? That's just a mystery we'll never understand I guess.
>>
>>66743908
You know the funny party?
They could make both powers a bonus action and not an Action, instead of making both an Action. But prefered to make the class even worse that already is.

They could kept stone skin as a 11th level feature instead of 17th (which by the way is the level IN WHERE YOU GET NOT STONE SKIN AS MONK).

Such blatant casterfaggotry.
>>
>>66743948
>monks don't want more damage
>the martial class with lowest damage in the game by a large marging doesn't want more damage
sure
>>
>>66743148
Hobgoblin can get you rapier. At level 4 you can even pick up moderatley armored for Medium Armor, a Shield, and +1 Dex.
>>
>>66743946
>Also if the rules are as intended then the bonus action can be taken anywhere or it can't.
You're making a big fucking assumption to say that a bonus action with a condition that must be met can be made at any time, even before you've properly inarguably cleared that condition

And I did mean it was original game design. There's two main game designs at play here: The balance and the actual mechanics. They're two different things.
One is the intended outcome, one is the intended system. They do not want to actively manage the game balance through sage advice, but they do want to make sure the mechanics are understood. That's what fucking sage advice is.
Try and keep up.
>>
>>66743965
Don't be so hypocritical. When it comes to 5e, I'm sure you've made far more mistakes by misunderstanding rules or saying something on the spot before looking back and thinking 'hey, wait, the rules don't say that, fuck'

Sure, as rules designer you expect him to have a higher standard of not doing that than you, but I'm pretty sure he fucks up less than you do.

>>66743990
Monks aren't designed to be damage dealers.
>>
>>66744044
yeah, they're designed to flee from combat as soon as possible because they're weak as fuck for a melee only class.
>>
>>66744067
Exactly, they're designed as a skirmisher, sort of like how rogue is. They have additional speed to help with this, as well as stuff like disengages build in or shadow teleports or shoving enemies around.
They also have stuns, which are stronger crowd control than any of the other martials get.
>>
>>66744044
So you literally can't defend his own inconsistency and keep trying to turn it to "yeah well I bet YOU!" get the fuck out. Also no, because I bother to read them and understand them and it isn't even my fucking job.
>>
>>66744099
I'm defending a human being sometimes fucking up with the argument,
hey,
he's actually a human being???
>>
>>66740538
Don't forget using wolf totem to prone anything that dare flies.
Aaracokra barbs are the best, so much fun.
>>
>>66743990
not by taking feats.
Monks want to do stat increases first and foremost.
>>
>>66744107
Yeah and I'm calling you a dick sucker for it because guess what, there is no fucking qualifier to be met other than "if you take the attack action" literally right from the feat. Do you know what does have one though? Monk flurry of blows because it specifies after you take the attack action. Crawford fucking ruled along the first line, then reaffirmed it with bonus action anywhere, then went back because apparently making an enemy make a save against being knocked on their ass is too powerful. It his fucking job to know this shit and I can prove him wrong because the language is different.
>>
>>66744090
>sort of like how rogue is
except rogue does it for free and deals more damage and is better at skills including grappling
>>
>>66740570
not every dungeon is tighter than a gnome's anus, anon.
>>
>>66744230
And you're saying that clearly the design intention with 'take the attack action' is that you don't even have to start making attacks?
That's some fairly liberal interpretation, and even if it's correct it shouldn't surprise you that, hey, that's not the design intent. Much like you aren't supposed to use two weapon fighting without making your normal attack first.
There are other cases like in war cleric where you make a bonus action attack when you take the attack action but they just didn't decide to then put 'but only after you've made your attack' or some sort of definition like 'saying you're going to take an action does not qualify as taking an action' or 'you can't take an action then immediately pause that action to do something else that required you to take that action'. I think EK has something similar with bonus actions, too.

This is just the one case where it actually sort of mattered when they didn't anticipate people to try and word their way around it to bonus action before they were supposed to. Shield master is just being set back in line with all the other 'bonus action with attack' features.
They probably only specified flurry of blows comes after your normal attack because of open hand, but just because they did something one time does not mean all other instances where they forgot to do something aren't intended to be designed the same.

It has nothing to do with how powerful the feat is.
Sage advice is not for rebalancing the game.
>>
>>66744234
Yeah, but rogue is still a worse grappler because they only get one attack rather than three and they sacrifice all their damage in order to grapple rather than 1/3 of their damage.

Monk can do it for free by using it alongside stunning strike, open hand's ability, dodge bonus action, whatever. There are so many ways to disengage that monk is actually far more interesting because of the fact you can't do it for free but have to sort of have it as a 'buy one get one free' offer with another feature.
>>
>>66744230
also lemme point out that they only included the 'no clones of a clone' rule in AL, they never made that official errata as far as I know.
They only balance shit for AL. If it's errata, it's designed to fix where they fucked up the rules, not fucked up game balance.
>>
>>66744338
If you take the attack action is a pretty clear qualifier, take the attack action and that's it. Coupled with Crawford originally ruling yes you can, then reaffirming you can use the bonus action anywhere then yes its fucking crystal clear. So long as you take the attack action, period. Also if they didn't decide to then guess what that's their fucking problem and they are 100% rebalancing the feat by suddenly adding wording that isn't there.
If they wanted the qualifier to be "after you take the attack action" like flurry of blows then I want you to guess how they should have worded it cum stain.
>>
File: 1462827554739.gif (795 KB, 245x168)
795 KB
795 KB GIF
>>66744379
>Its not designed to do x
>Except when they do x
>>
>>66744359
a rogue is going to have +6 to grapple compared to a monk

also you only have 2 tries with monk, because martial arts bonus attack and flurry are stated to be only usable to deliver actuall attack, not grapple/shove

also
>If you’re able to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this Attack replaces one of them.
Those aren't part of the Attack action, those are bonus actions triggered by an attack action
>>
>>66744446
Simulacrum is designed to copy the spell slots you have.
Wish is designed to replicate a lower level spell.
There is no ruling problem in wish-simulacrum, it was just broken game balance wise because they didn't anticipate this use, or it's part of the 'well, I'm sure someone will find a way to break high level spellcasting'

Wow, wish was designed to be a dumb, gamebreaking spell. Who knew?
>>
>>66744504
Yeah and so they used it for the exact thing you said it wasn't meant for.
>>
>>66744433
>Player walks up to a creature using up all movement
>No one else is around for 15 ft
>Goes for bonus action shield bash (supposedly can do if it takes the attack action)
>Misses
>Creature was readying a misty step spell to teleport of of range (hypothetically trigger was on a shove attempt)
>Player can no longer attack the creature with attack action
>Has not actually fulfilled the criteria for a shield bash
>>
>>66744433
>Coupled with Crawford originally ruling yes you can
All he says is
"As with most bonus actions, you choose the timing, so the Shield Master shove can come before or after the Attack action."
He doesn't address the fact that it requires you to take an attack action, he presumably didn't think too hard about it and just gave the general ruling, that bonus actions could be done whenever. It's entirely possible he didn't consider the 'requires you to take the attack action' part at that moment in time because this is probably just one of many tweets he's going through and responding to.
When he realizes he made that mistake, he goes back and says 'no, that wasn't the rules intention'. He never intended to rule that in the first place.

We then get the infamous:
"If a feature says you can do X as a bonus action if you do Y, you must do Y before you can do X"
Which is really not surprising at all. It makes logical sense, more than trying to twist it into some sort of paradox where if something stops you from actual doing the action in the future the world breaks down and collapses in on itself because you were trying to put it on pause.

Yes, there are features like flurry of blows,
but there are also features like True Polymorph that say you can choose what a creature is polymorphed into. Does this mean that Polymorph, which doesn't say you can choose what creature you're polymorphed into, can't choose what a creature is polymorphed into and the DM decides for you?
>>
>>66744544
It's meant to do what it's doing, it just turns out that it's gamebreaking, like GWM is doing what it's meant to be doing but turns out to be pretty much required for some classes.
>>
>>66744587
>Misty step
>shove attempt trigger
I'll take shit that never actually happens.
>>
>>66744608
So why don't they fix it then? They've shown the claim was wrong so if it isn't intended then why not fix it?
>>
>>66744587
Taking the attack action =/= attacking
Taking the attack action simply means you are designating your action to attacking and can do nothing else with that action, you can forego actually attacking or become unable to do so
>>66744590
Nigger he LITERALLY says
>the Shield Master shove can come before or after the Attack action
it does not get more explicit than that, your entire argument boils down to
>well you should just assume that he's a retard and didn't know his own rules of his own game when he made the tweet
which still proves that he's a retard
>>
>>66744590
also
>When he realizes he made that mistake, he goes back and says 'no, that wasn't the rules intention'. He never intended to rule that in the first place.
several years went by between those two tweets and he never thought to correct it in that time so that's a load of bullshit
>>
File: 1528751538374.jpg (91 KB, 959x540)
91 KB
91 KB JPG
>>66744590
Sounds like its DM's choice on who does because of lack of wording, but guess what we're not talking about it being not present, we're talking about it being different.
>>
>>66744693
>Taking the attack action =/= attacking
>Taking the attack action simply means you are designating your action to attacking and can do nothing else with that action, you can forego actually attacking or become unable to do so

If one doesn't attack, then one has not taken the attack action.
>>
>>66744670
Because all they're doing is patching up bugs and clarifying grey areas.

They aren't nerfing things because that's just how it is. Yu-gi-oh didn't nerf pot of greed, the tournaments just banned it, much like AL bans the shit they think is dumb.
>>
>>66744777
barbarian using reaction from berserker
>>
>If you take the Attack action on your turn, you can use a bonus action to try to shove a creature within 5 feet of you with your shield.
RAW, you do not have to attack BEFORE using your bonus action, you only have to attack on your turn, doesn't matter what some nigger on twitter says
>>
>>66744824
>barbarian using reaction from berserker

>Starting at 14th level, when you take damage from a creature that is within 5 feet of you. you can use your reaction to make a melee weapon attack against that creature.

That's a melee weapon attack. Not an attack action.
>>
>>66744777
Again, taking the attack action just means you designate your action to attacking, that does not mean you have to commit to the attack
By using the bonus action shove, you are committing your action to taking the attack action, if you decide later not to attack or become unable to attack, you've still taken the attack action and can't use that action for something else
>>
>>66744901
You said:
>If one doesn't attack, then one has not taken the attack action.
He attacks, and yet hasn't take the attack action
>>
>>66744693
I've already said several times that yes, he makes mistakes, he is a human being, the tweet was a mistake because he has to get through a lot of mouthbreathers who can't understand basic English language and he might possibly try and rule something from memory rather than double-checking what he wrote in the book.

You can read the 5e PHB all you want, but even after years of reading it you won't remember every little thing, word for word and how each rule links into each other. Sooner or later, you'll fuck up.
Maybe he could be constantly flipping through the rulebook to try and respond to all the faggots on twitter but that would just waste more time when they've already presented the rule in question, just that it doesn't show the full rule properly.

If making mistakes makes you a retard, we're all retards and the robot masterminds will take us over shortly.

>>66744726
Maybe because most people didn't give a shit and talk to him about it?
He makes a ton of these comments on sage advice (I wish twitter had a way to easily count the number of tweets, you have to install some sort of software to count it for you) so he's not going to notice until eventually a question is asked that he notices about a tweet he made some time ago, one of many things he said.
So he just goes and says 'no, that was wrong, whoops' and everyone loses their shit like apes flinging shit in a zoo at passersby.
There aren't very many other cases where he does this, maybe a few.
>>
File: image0-6.jpg (151 KB, 800x800)
151 KB
151 KB JPG
>>66744876
>Shove as a bonus action
>Still haven't made attacks
>Something prevents you from taking those attacks such as a reaction
>You now can't have made the shove as a bonus action
>Reality starts to disintegrate around you as the timeline attempts to right itself
>The game collapses
>The house catches fire
"Working as intended."
>>
>>66744986
see >>66744914
>>
>>66745025
Other anon has the wrong point. You can take the attack action then attack the air or not attack anything,

But the idea of taking the attack action, telling your DM you are doing nothing with your attack action and not making your attacks,
then deciding later after doing something that requires the attack action 'hey, DM, you remember those attacks I purposefully didn't make a while ago? Can I make them now?'
>>
>>66744914
Aside from the Ready action, there is no designating or committing to actions.
On a turn, an action hasn't occurred until it has been fully resolved.
>>
>>66745067
you can make your attacks at any point during your turn though, just like you could attack once, move, do something with your bonus action, then attack again
you do not have to attack as soon as you take the attack action
>>
>>66745106
Except that's wrong retard
If you're a fighter with multiple attacks, you have taken the attack action as soon as you make your first attack and can do other things between then and using the rest of your attacks, shield master is the same but instead of your first attack, you take the attack action when you attack OR use your bonus action shove
>>
>>66745110
No, I'm pretty sure you can't. You are explicitly allowed to move between attacks, but otherwise you can't take the attack action and then action surge and cast lightning bolt before taking your last attack of the attack action.

I don't remember any ruling that says you can do things other than that movement between attacks. You could probably argue that bonus actions should be able to be done between attacks due to crawford's tweet, and before crawford's latest tweet on shield master I would have probably agreed that you can make an attack, shove with your bonus action then make another attack, but not before you've even done any part of the attack action.
>>
>>66745133
If you need to throw insults, you've lost the argument.
>>
>>66744986
Odd they didn't errata Martial arts and literally works the same.
>>
>>66745197
There's not really any reason to. You can't shove with martial arts then attack with your normal attacks, and even if you could it likely wouldn't be a big deal so nobody ever asks the question 'can I attack with martial arts first'

It'd only matter if you have a weapon that requires your opponent to be hurt first or something.
Well, with the new shieldmaster sage advice it's clear you have to make the attacks before you use martial arts' bonus actions.
>>
>>66745179
Yes you literally can, there is no rule that says you have to make all your attacks before doing anything else
>>66745181
>I have no argument
Thanks for conceding, retard
>>
>>66745133
You haven't really taken the action then, you're 'taking the action' rather than 'have taken the action'.
That said, shield master does say when you 'take' the bonus action, which is why you could at least argue
>you make your first attack and can do other things between then and using the rest of your attacks
But can you really say you're doing something when you're not actually doing something? It's a big stretch to say you're taking an action before doing anything included in that action.

They really should've just put 'taken' into shield master instead of 'take'. It's amazing the amount of chaos a single letter difference can make.
>>
>>66745321
Shield master doesn't say you have to "have taken the attack action", it says specifically "IF you take the attack action on your turn"
Not "if you HAVE taken", it's "IF you TAKE"
It does not require you to have already attacked, it only requires that you take the attack action on your turn
>>
https://www.sageadvice.eu/2019/04/06/when-you-take-the-attack-action-is-the-trigger-for-the-two-weapon-fighting-bonus-action-attack-the-entire-attack-action/
"The action doesn't exist if you haven't done it. The Attack action in D&D isn't an abstraction; it means an actual attack has occurred."

I mean this is all being posted after the whole shieldmaster fiasco but, hey.
>>
>>66745239
There's no rule saying you can't take the attack action, wait 5 years then make your second attack as far as I know, either.
>>
>>66740943
No. You're using the haft of your pole arm. So it's not heavy.
>>
>>66745410
maybe the 'on your turn' part but then as long as you make the attack on one of your future turns it might work?
>>
>>66745410
Yes there is, you have to take it on your turn, which is 6 seconds
>>
>>66745133
>you have taken the attack action as soon as you make your first attack
No you've only resolved one attack within the attack action.

There is a difference between an attack and the attack action.
The attack action encapsulates 1+ melee or ranged attacks. Once those have all been resolved, the attack action has been taken.
Movement is also explicitly allowed between attacks.
>>
>>66745433
You can still have a turn in 5 years, so you're still doing it on your turn.
It doesn't say on the same turn you take the action, does it? :^)
>>
File: shut up nigger.png (26 KB, 633x439)
26 KB
26 KB PNG
>>66745420
>>
>>66745222
>There's not really any reason to
1. I use my bonus action martial art attack
2. My Action gets cancelled for whatever reason as you mentioned
3. Wtf? I made my bonus action but I didn't actually use my Action to attack

Same shit, anon

See how flurry literally has "After you make Attack action with yaddayadda", but martial arts don't, so if something cancels your action and yet you made the bonus action, is not outside of RAI
>>
>>66745420
T. Brainlet

A heavy weapon is heavy independently with the part you strike with
>>
>>66745483
And martial arts works the same way as the shield master so I don't see what argument you're trying to make?

You can replace 'martial arts' and 'shield master' bonus actions interchangably and you get the same argument as to why you shouldn't be letting people do something before the triggering action.
>>
>>66745434
No, the attack action has been taken as soon as you declare that you are taking the attack action, otherwise you could attack once and then do a different action since, according to you, you haven't taken the attack action
>>66745471
"Your turn" only applies to your turn in the current round
>>
>>66745530
>"Your turn" only applies to your turn in the current round
And where does it say that? I mean, there might be a rule that actually says that, but I don't know where it is.
>>
File: shieeeeeet.png (39 KB, 552x577)
39 KB
39 KB PNG
>>66745517
>And martial arts works the same way as the shield master so I don't see what argument you're trying to make?
You can make the bonus action attack from martial arts BEFORE actually using the Attack action.

If they both work the same I guess you can make the shove before to. Clase closed then, thanks for clarifying.
>>
>>66745574
That post is from august 2015 and is clarified as being wrong as of the latest tweet regarding bonus actions and shit like shieldmaster.
>>
>>66740692
It's shove prone, then grapple.
Your way just leaves you shiving their grappled ankle while they drop a boulder on you.
>>
>>66745574
also Jeremy Crawford doesn't even address martial arts there, he just says you can't flurry of blows until after the attacks.
He probably considers martial arts to also have a specified timing (yes, it doesn't say you can just make an unarmed attack as part of a bonus action, you have to take the attack action first)
>>
>>66745530
>No, the attack action has been taken as soon as you declare that you are taking the attack action, otherwise you could attack once and then do a different action since, according to you, you haven't taken the attack action

If you have made an attack, then you have either resolved or are in the process of resolving the attack action.
If the attack action has been taken, then all attacks have been resolved.

Until you actually start the steps of resolving a particular action, you are not taking that action. Whilst resolving the method of the action as outlined, you are taking the action. Once all the action is resolved, you have taken the action.
>>
>>66745767
You are wrong, I am right, and no where in RAW does it state the bonus action has to be taken after the attack
Seethe, crawnigger
>>
>>66745866
I see we're not coming to any resolution on this so, let us agree to disagree on this topic.
>>
>>66745866
I'm fucking your mom right now.
I mean, I'm not actually doing it, but that doesn't mean I'm not doing it.
>>
>>66745923
>>66745935
Seething crawnigger
>>
>>66745956
Mate, I'm not even mad. I'm just arguing semantics of the rules.

I let the shield bash happen before attacks at my table, if something prevents the attack action predicate I treat the shield bash as a shove action. Simple.
>>
>>66746050
Honestly I'd probably either let it be done before the actions if it's in some sort of min-maxed game where everyone's trying to make optimal characters since in that case I wouldn't want to discourage using it instead of PAMGWM shittery,
but otherwise I'd probably say it should be after the action because that's far more fun/interesting than it being used all the time just as a way to grant yourself advantage. It means you think about your teammates when you use the bonus action.
>>
and personally myself I'd take shieldmaster and stick to the ruling that you use it after the attacks because I'm not here to race damage.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.