File: phww.png (599 KB, 533x679)

599 KB PNG

>>94248344
Drakenguard was a fun game.
I made a homebrew boss item as an homage to the weapon wheel system. It was pretty shit, but I didn't care.

>tq
Celestial because edgelord shit gets old

>>94247974
I mainly went Gloom Stalker for the always-on invisibility in darkness, which is flat out busted. Straight Bard would be good, but I'd probably go Swords or Whispers for the RP since I'm Drow, and as far as I can tell either would fit well. For example using my weapons as a Swordsbard spell focus would be pretty good too.

Right now though, I'm thinking of going Lunar Sorcerer. Trickster Cleric was also very tempting, but I'd probably do that with either a Bard or more likely Rogue.

From what I can tell, Lunar Sorc is pretty great, gives access to a bunch of spells that don't count against my Sorcerer spell list, and the 6th level feature that lets me use metamagic without expending a point based on my spellschool seems really awesome. The campaign we're on will probably only go to the 12th level, so I might end up going like 5 Ranger, 6 Sorcerer or something.

When casting spells, you need a free hand to use the somatic component, right? So if I take Two-Weapon fighting as a Ranger, I'll actually be locked out of a lot of spells? In that case, would it be best to go Dueling? Maybe something like a Rapier or a Longsword?

Speaking of, is there no way to make the Longsword use Finesse for dex rolls rather than strength? Or am I not understanding the system?

>>94248344
>TQ
Always blade pact. Spellsword as an archetype is my shit

Oathbreaker or hexblade?
Also another requestion: how edgy can someone be before going into uncool parody territory?

>>94248344
>pact
The only one that sits well with me is Great Old One.
The others make sense, sure, but to me they feel like they should happen through the story itself rather than when starting out.

>>94248399
>When casting spells, you need a free hand to use the somatic component, right? So if I take Two-Weapon fighting as a Ranger, I'll actually be locked out of a lot of spells? In that case, would it be best to go Dueling? Maybe something like a Rapier or a Longsword?
I assume you're using 2014 rules? In which case yes you'd need an open hand to cast spells with a somatic component unless you have War Caster or you're casting a spell with both a Material and Somatic component in which case you could use the Material Component hand as the Somatic Component hand. Casting rules are dumb but thats how they work. If you're Two-Weapon Fighting you'll want to drop one of your weapons before casting a spell then pick it back up with your item interaction. If you have Reaction spells like Shield that use Somatic or Material components then you need to end your turn with at least one free hand- or again- get War Caster.

>Speaking of, is there no way to make the Longsword use Finesse for dex rolls rather than strength? Or am I not understanding the system?
The Finesse property? No. There's some magic items that are Longswords that have the Finesse property but its not possible for you to give that property to a Longsword. However it is possible to get a Longsword with Dexterity by playing a Monk at level 2 they get Dedicated Weapon which could turn a Longsword into a Monk Weapon making it use Dexterity HOWEVER I don't think your Monk Weapons work while wearing armor or donning shield or wielding a non Monk Weapon.

>>94248482
Both can be cool it depends on what you're going for imo. Do you want a mysterious Patron and access to curses and Charisma weapons? Play a Warlock. If you want to be a Paladin with dark evil powers that relate to undeath and fear, then play the Oathbreaker.
>Also another requestion: how edgy can someone be before going into uncool parody territory?
Depends completely on your group. As long as you don't mess over your other players or break any spoken or unspoken boundaries set by the table you may be okay. When it comes to playing an Evil PC, you should also double check with your DM and group to see if this is the type of campaign that can work for.

>>94238339
It's like job applications for players

>put out a million and pray one bites

>>94248344
aye what site is this / for?

MjAyNCBQSEIsIE5vIFRodW1icywgT0NSZWQsIEFub24ncyBCb29rbWFya3MgdHJhbnNmZXJyZWQgb3Zlci4gCgpodHRwczovL2Vhc3l1cGxvYWQuaW8vd2Fvcm9h

>>94249034
Unironically ask ChatGPT

>>94249043
Well it was wrong three times.

>>94249034
it's a link to retardfilter.com, it's for filtering retards

>>94249088
Thats nice, gonna be more useful, or gonna be a retard?

>>94249034
Kids these days, they don't know

lurk moar or fuck off

>>94249145

ah, okay, a retard then

not mega, not tinyurl, not pastebin, LuRk MoRe

Sure, just randomly wait for the answer instead of asking it. Fucktard

>>94249096
I don't help retards

>>94249153
Anon please you're glowing worse than an Aasimar divine soul sorcerer/celestial warlock mulitclass, please, learn to not embarrass yourself on the internet.

>>94249183
Sure thing hoss

>>94249183
>divine soul/celestial sorlock
sounds kino. is the idea some sort of weird healer hybrid or something?

File: 5751d447e53a30491c6863d71(...).jpg (31 KB, 667x670)

31 KB JPG

2014 ruling inquiry

So in 5e technically an area of obscurement only effects the targets within in

If you and the target are on opposite sides of an area of heavy obscurement but neither is within it- according to hard rules you can see each other fine no disadvantage to attacks or targeting restrictions. Does that strike anyone else as totally insane? You can see through a darkness spell, just not into it...

File: Spoiler Image (112 KB, 1045x1096)

112 KB JPG

>>94249189
:^)

>>94249242
a pane of glass provides full cover

>>94249243

Oh, no index, you got the shitcunt version

>MjAyNCBQSEIsIE5vIFRodW1icywgT0NSZWQsIEFub24ncyBCb29rbWFya3MgdHJhbnNmZXJyZWQgb3Zlci4gCgpodHRwczovL2Vhc3l1cGxvYWQuaW8vd2Fvcm9h

>>94249237
You could do a coffeelock type thing (actually is that viable in 5
5?) I guess - you were born to do a Job (in a cosmic sense), the warlock pact just makes sure you stay on the divine mission.

Whether you're on a mission from god or trying to rebel against your destiny, plenty of cool character stuff to go with it.

>some bluehairs and noserings in my group just made a series of holocaust, suicide bombing and axe wound jokes during the game
I've been walking on eggshells around these people for the past 6 months did they just became based overnight?

You guys play any other TTRPG? My group wants to try other stuff out. Pathfinder has been floated around.

>>94249842
Pathfinder is the exact same game.
Rather play some Free League or Cubicle7 stuff if you want to play something popular.

>>94249842
Yes, many. But I always comeback to dnd 5e (or 3.5). I think ttrpg players go through 3 phases.

1. Phase 1 - DnD is the only RPG Ive ever heard of
2. Phase 2 - DnD is babies first RPG and it sucks
3. Phase 3 - DnD is the greatest RPG.

A hunter guild like in Monster Hunter makes more sense for DnD than an Adventurer's Guild
Prove me wrong.

File: tunnel-silhouette-mysteri(...).jpg (1.15 MB, 5184x3456)

1.15 MB JPG

>>94249242
>Does that strike anyone else as totally insane? You can see through a darkness spell, just not into it...
No. The unaffected area is like light at the end of a tunnel.

>>94250110
Both exist, but in DnD the threats are a bit more complicated than a dangerous monster or an Elder Dragon causing ecological and maybe some local city or town or village damage. Threats in DnD could be highly intelligent people like Liches or an entire community or organization- sometimes you have groups who need to go to different planes or have to do assassination work or social work. Basically Adventurer Guilds are more broad whereas a Hunter's Guild is more specialized. But both exist in DnD settings guilds, for example the Slayer's Take is just a group of Monster Hunters who are hired to kill monsters and animals. or The Gur who do the same.

I'm planning out a campaign and I've always worried about the improv part when DMing since im not that quick witted and my stutter doesn't help. Any DMs here on the same shoes as me? Do you guys have any advice?

>>94250238
crutch hard on descriptive roleplay

>>94249842
Savage worlds is pretty rad. Apparently it's seldom mentioned due to some schizo from ages past but it's probably my favourite system of all time.
Easy to teach, easy to flavour. IMO it's what people should use instead of mangling 5e to suit their purposes.

>>94250238
Descriptive Roleplaying- read pages 17 & 18 in the 2024 PHB, it gives an example of how you play this way and what to look out for. Also your new so I would expect your players to give you some slack.

Can’t decide between warlock or Valor bard for my 2024 “im going to be the best (magical) swordsman ever!”

Archfey and fiend have some fun subclass abilities and pact of the tome means when I get weapon masteries I can attack 4 times a turn with charisma. Patron adds a nice rp element but something about that cantrip extra attack just keeps me coming back.
I suppose I could go bard 6 and then ask to find a bargain for more power.

File: Beast.jpg (19 KB, 300x400)

19 KB JPG

What are your latest character ideas, Anon? I've recently started putting together a Shifter Wizard of Scribes, inspired by Beast.

It’s me again. The guy who really wants an arcane monk subclass.

I can’t decide between the main mechanic revolving around a scroll (basically wizards spell book) or having ki interact with spells like sorcery points. I’m kind of struggling to think of some abilities for it that aren’t a straight rip from sorcery though.
I was considering replacing an attack from flurry with a cantrip for 1 ki.
Any ideas?

>>94250360
Funny enough. Archfey bladelock teifling after night crawler.
I like the idea of having two really toxic super powered parents.
Dads going to be a teifling and mum will be the patron.
Hoping the dm will work with it.

>>94248344
Blade pact and therefore it used to be hexblade but now with 2024 I really really like the idea of Archfey blade pact.
Mechanically it’s a spell blade who can teleport every turn and eventually in between turns.
Flavour wise can’t decide between an heir who’s picked up the pact or an heir who took on the pact to fill overbearing expectations.

>>94248344
>tq
I'm a certified Tome enjoyer because having a boat load of cantrips is always useful and getting ritual casting as a Warlock really opens up your spell options.

>>94250110
Ah stop it. The new game comes out just as the next campaign is schedule to start and I just know I’ll want to play a hunter of sorts.
Ranger is off the table because I’m playing one right now.
I think 2 players will be running bards.

Maybe I’ll give the new EK ago.

>>94249183
>tfw literally playing an aasimar celestial warlock
:(

>>94250412
I just wish we could add spells to the book.
Also kind of wish we had a subclass or two that stole the book mechanic from wizards.

>>94250435
I mean you can add ritual spells to it with Book of Ancient Secrets, which is neat

>>94250365
For balance. Should this monk subclass be a third caster or half caster.

>>94250444
My dm is adamant we play 2024 rules moving forward. Can I still use book of ancient secrets?

File: Black Gauntlet Judas.jpg (76 KB, 386x314)

76 KB JPG

>>94250360
>Atlas
>Gloom Stalker Ranger 5
>Life Cleric 1, maybe fighter levels, maybe many more cleric levels
>Vuman for XBE+SS by 4th
He slays encounters and carries the party on his back.

>Judas
>Twilight Cleric
>Really grumpy
>Thought he was doing the right thing by telling local authorities about an angel walking among men
>Would sacrifice himself for his friends if it came to it
>Has Pariah's Shield

>Delg
>Dwarven Wizard (any)
>Grumpy
>Hates magic
>Doesn't use magic unless it's a sensible use
>Magic always leads to trouble
>"Don't make me use the rod!"
>Is a cobbler and always washes the party's dishes after eating. Without magic.

>>94250476
Genuinely no clue

>>94250476
You need to ask your DM. It's from 2014, but seems like a benign option to just include in 2024 edition.

Conjuration Wizard is a player trap.
90% of the time you won't actually get to use it to its full ability and is too subjective.

>>94245895
Hmm. I guess it works, but I'll confess I'm a little disappointed. Something I liked about the name (which I guess I should have pointed out if I wanted it to be factored in) is that apotheosis means rising to godhood, and "dog" is "god" backwards, so there's scope for something interesting along the lines of "divinity through reversal", letting something low become very high.

In any case though, thanks for the items, they're cool.

Did 5.5e fix the problem where hexblade is the only Warlock that can keep up with other full casters in a long rest only game?

Bards as a class based inherently around recounting information should be an intelligence caster with a spellbook.

>>94248344
>TQ
Celestial, ever since I realized that Jean Valjean is the archetypal celestial warlock the way that Faust is the archetypal fiend warlock.

>>94249034
Base64

>>94250537
They added Magical Cunning as a way to restore half your spell slots (rounded up) and gave more classes features that restore on a short rest so you can collectively press your DM not to be a faggot.

>>94250609
Absolute king

>>94250612
Won't those long rest classes still get them back on a long rest anyway though?

>>94250646
Yes, but they also want to get the short rest abilities back too, especially seeing as long rests are limited to once per 24 hours

>>94250365
>when tou take the attack action, you can replace one attack you make on your turn with a damaging cantrip (no cost)
>as a bonus action you can expend 1 ki to cast a non-damaging cantrip on your turn.
>in both cases the cantrip must have a casting time of one action

There, it's literally just the core monk features in spell form

>>94250652
I find that when given the option between a short rest and a long rest, most parties with long casters will favor it especially when it seems like there's nothing left to do that day.

Most sessions are typically

>Long rest
>Big combat
>Long rest

And if there's going to be another big combat, they'll try (and often) just have a long rest in between.

>>94250652
>>94250718
That is to say, yes, there will often only be a major combat every 24 hours with the playstyle of not a small number of DMs.

File: caster monk features.jpg (452 KB, 632x1664)

452 KB JPG

>>94250365
A few things from my Four Elements rework that might be relevant to you. It's a 1/3 caster.

File: 9d19a996993e1ae226ad51e7e(...).jpg (470 KB, 1920x2840)

470 KB JPG

What is your most played class? (Counting multiclasses)

File: 5.5 no thumb.png (259 KB, 929x454)

259 KB PNG

>>94250734
Paladin, Cleric, Druid. In that order.

>>94250734
fighter by an incredible margin

>>94250734
Well to tally it up
>Fighter: 3 (2 pure, 1 multiclassed)
>Warlock: 3 (2 pure, 1 multiclassed)
>Cleric: 2 (all multiclassed)
>Sorcerer: 2 (all multiclassed)
>Rogue: 1 (multiclassed)
>Monk: 1 (pure)
So Fighter & Warlock are tied for both overall and pure characters, Cleric & Sorcerer are tied for multiclassed characters.

>>94250734
I think it might be either monk or ranger, but I DM so much more frequently than I play that I don't have a good feel for it.

>>94250758
>>94250734
Oh forgot, I've got 1 Ranger multiclass (it was with one of the Clerics)

>>94250772
I rarely see someone multiclass Cleric, what exactly were they?

>>94250781
First one was a War Cleric with just a 2 Fighter dip, never got a Fighter subclass. I was exercising the reason Crawford got rid of Action Surge working with spells.
Second one was Death Cleric/Gloom Stalker Ranger. He was specifically for a one shot because he was kind of a cunt that I wouldn't want to play for a full campaign but holy shit did he stack damage dice.

File: lvgl2wh3igj61.jpg (85 KB, 800x600)

85 KB JPG

>>94250734
Fighter, Battle Master to be specific. I multiclass into it quite often for my martial characters. I like the options it gives, as its not just boosting your offensive it also boosts your skills too.

In my life I've played a...
>Tabaxi Great Old One Warlock who loved Aberrant Horrors and learning more about them.
>Human Swashbuckler Rogue/Battle Master Rogue who loved money, manipulation, and stabbing bastards.
>Human Pugilist who got captured by some goblins and punched his way out. Took a nap by doing some push ups and crunches - so he could power bomb more goblins.
>Half-Elf Swords Bard/Battle Master Fighter, religious devotee to Shelyn/Sune loves competitive dueling, his family, performance, and passionate folk.
>Changeling Oath of Vengeance Paladin, he masqueraded as a Human and worked as a Purple Dragon Knight of Cormyr on a hunt for criminals and most importantly Graz'zt cultist (who his family was a part of). His girlfriend got snatched up and mind broken by Graz'zt but he rescued her and now is taking care of her for the rest of his life.
>Kobold Beast Master Ranger a pirate who lost her crew/found family to an Ancient Sea Dragon and is on the hunt to cobble together a new crew and ship to find and kill that bastard and avenge her family.
That's everything I've played in the last 9 years of 5e DnD...most of them I've only played once in a single one-off and never touched again. The only one I've played throughout was the Bard, he was super fun. I also played the Paladin for more than one session.

>>94250360
>Tempest Cleric w/ halberd
>Vuman for Spell sniper
>Can pick up booming blade and technically extend its reach to 10 feet
>10 ft booming blade + reach weapon = fun
>Warcaster at level 4, can cast a spell(booming blade) as an opportunity attack
Inspired by a lightning priestess character.

>>94250825
You gonna pick up Polearm Master too?

>>94250831
Definitely up for consideration. Same with GWM.

>>94250718
>And if there's going to be another big combat, they'll try (and often) just have a long rest in between.
If the DM lets them do so all the time without consequence, he's a pushover that doesn't challenge his players. Nothing wrong with that if that's what the group likes, but if there's no challenge there's also nothing to keep up with.

>>94248344
What are anons' approach to making enemy stat blocks? I've been prepping for a new campaign and making stat blocks for it, but I want to hear what you anons think. Do you try to make PC statblocks and adjust them for encounters? Do you pore through existing enemy stat blocks and modify them? Do you just use the DMG monsters as-is?

And how do you put these enemies together into an encounter? Do you use CR? Some representation of the enemy's level? Pure intuition? Or something else?

>>94249867
I find Phase 3 is more recognizing that D&D is the system that gets you games. It breaks down the further you get from heroic fantasy dungeon crawling/battle sessions, but that's a fun niche and I love my fantasyslop.

>>94250734
Fighter is top, but Paladin and Cleric are tied for second.

>>94250888
Yeah it sucks.
It's always the most deadliest and dangerous fights, but then it's a long rest.

Which is great if you're a full caster or long rest bsaed class or like a paladin that Nova's the shit out of enemies.

Not so much for short rest classes.

>>94250590
>Jean Valjean is the archetypal celestial warlock
Huh. Never thought of it that way.

>>94249867
Phase 4: D&D is at its best when homebrewed to such an extent that it is still recognizable, but uniquely suited to your table's tastes

>>94251206
>Jean Valjean, my brother, you no longer belong to evil, but to good. It is your soul that I buy from you; I withdraw it from black thoughts and the spirit of perdition, and I give it to God.
>My soul belongs to God, I know. I made that bargain long ago. He gave me hope when hope was gone.
Both the book and the musical use language around soul-based transactions to describe Valjean's new lease on life. It's a fantastic template for a celestial warlock having actual conflicts instead of just an angelic sugar daddy.

File: 1687656066084668.jpg (27 KB, 399x399)

27 KB JPG

>Playing the Goodest Good Boy to have ever Good Boy'd noble-bastard Knight
>Literally just by being a nice person and being kind to everyone people love him
>DM has shown that even a Princess is sweet on him for his chivalric and honorable nature

He's so fucking dense and unaware that every time a woman flirts with him, he just thinks they're being nice. Showed up to the private chambers of the Princess last night to give her a Scroll of Find Greater Steed before they set out on an escort mission. She was dressed in a nightgown, got close to him, caressed his cheek and held his hand.

>"Wow, the Princess sure is nice. I'm glad that we're friends."

The rest of the party is seething that my lad just doesn't get it. Though really it's all because he's got incredibly low self worth/view due to the Bastard status that he can't even think women would be interested.

>>94250584
Everyone should get a spell book subclass.
Works on rogues. Rangers. Paladins. Druid. Monks. Warlock already has tome so that’s fine.
No ritual caster fear doesn’t count. Yes it would count if it scaled or could be upgraded.

>>94250679
Why limit it to non damaging cantrip?
What about after you cast a spell gain one of the following for 1 ki. Extra movement. Some ac. Maybe spend extra ki to up cast spells too.

Cantrip attack will be the level 6 feature for sure.

>>94248399
>When casting spells, you need a free hand to use the somatic component, right?

check out the war caster feat

File: graaztmyboy.jpg (134 KB, 640x663)

134 KB JPG

How can I trick my DM into letting me enter into a relationship with picrel?

>>94252232
>How can I trick my DM
There's this neat thing called having a conversation, and stating what you want.

>>94251071
>Do you pore through existing enemy stat blocks and modify them? Do you just use the DMG monsters as-is?
Mostly these two.

Generally for a humanoid boss I take a gladiator or something similar, mod the weapons and AC and add a racial template, like dragon breath and resistances

>>94251071
>>94252338
Oh, and to answer these, I use intuition and don't care too much about whether it's hard, my players are smart enough to prep for future encounters and to use consumables etc as needed.

A double deadly encounter is only moderately challenging for a rested party most of the time. You can always adjust difficulty on the fly simply on whether enemies act instinctively or tactically, if they retreat when damaged etc. Maybe the wolves just want to drag a single party member away to eat later, maybe they'll flee once they take a bit of damage. Perhaps the goblins will flee deeper into the dungeon and prepare an ambush with the help of reinforcements.

>>94250360
>Bracca
>Goliath elements monk (5.5e)
>actually a pro wrestler
>exclusively unarmed and grapples
>flavour it all as suplexes, elbows, slaps, and other theatrical pro wrestling moves
>kinnikuman anime moves once flying is unlocked

>>94250412
I picked Tome through the feat myself, but at level 5 I think I'm going to swap out for sword. Think I'll dual wield conjured swords through Shadow Blade.
>get to play Sorc spellsword at my leasure
>plus one minute of unga bunga two-weapon fighting 2d8 light/nick four attacks a round whenever I have Shadow Blade ready
>could even metamagic it to two minutes at a time or 3d8 upcast it with a 3rd level slot to really nuke shit
I'm not sure how long the average fight lasts though, in terms of minutes.

When Pact of the Sword says the weapon is bonded to you, can that be taken to mean you get the same bonded weapon bonuses as Eldritch Knight? Teleporting it back to your hand, can't be disarmed and such?

I mean if it was a conjured weapon you could always just use a bonus action to recast the spell and have a new one reappear in your hand if you're disarmed or throw it or whatever anyway...

>>94250734
Not counting oneshots.
>4e: Wizard Human
>4e: Warlock Dragonborn
>PF1e: Witch Elf
>PF1e: Wizard Human
>PF1e: Wizard Samsaran
>PF1e: Bard Human
>5e: Wizard Elf
>5e: Warlock Drow
>5e: Sorcerer/Warlock Half-Elf
>5e: Barbarian/Rogue Harengon
I don't know.

>>94248344
>TQ

Personally I'm surprised we don't have a Dragon Pact or a Giant Pact for the Warlocks but I assume either would play to similarly to Draconic Sorcerer or Giant Barbarian
That being either too good or being an objectively inferior version
Ooze would be cool too, really that half the other categories of creatures don't have their own pacts is disappointing

>>94250734
I haven't played enough to really be able to compare all that much.

>~40 sessions long campaign, played as a divination wizard, only took a single level of knowledge cleric in the very last session after defeating the bbeg. Levels 1 to 8.
>Same campaign as above, played as a bard two of the sessions just to try out and because it made sense for the wizard to not join. Level 2.
>One shot, played as a fighter, I think it was level 1.
>Another one shot, played as a life cleric.

>>94253019
You only got up to 8 in 40 sessions?

>>94252896
It feels like some themes for subclasses can easily get so redundant between different classes tho. Really feels like something similar to prestige classes could be better than just having separate subclasses from separate classes getting almost identical flavor.

>>94253032
Number of sessions per level:
6 sessions at level 1
8 in level 2
6 in level 3
11 in level 4
6 in level 5
5 in level 6
5 in level 7
We only got to level 8 like in the last 10 minutes of the last session, it was more of a "that battle would have earned you a level up".

>>94253087
Oh of course, you started at Level 1.
My group has been starting at 3 for so fucking long it's skewed my perspective.

File: Isaac clueless.png (353 KB, 1280x1024)

353 KB PNG

>>94251456
art of the moment in question

>>94253112
I want to turn his smile into a frown.

>>94253227
He's not even stupid regarding most things, just utterly clueless with women. It's a fun gimmick so far that myself and the DM are having a lotta fun with.

>>94253087
It's usually only 1-2 sessions at level 1, 8 must have been unbearable

>>94253032
In a recent campaign it took us on average like 100 sessions to level up. But it was a high level campaign. 16+.
That's what happens when a DM doesn't use XP.

>>94252232
Tell your DM you've got a rape fanfic

>>94253291
In retrospect it was the most fun.
>No "I cast solve problem!"
>Resources really fucking mattered
>Death was scary, permadeaths of pcs and NPCs with no real way to prevent it.
Level 5+ felt like there were lots of choices, but either we had to intentionally nerf ourselves/pick stuff "suboptimally", or DM had to homebrew bullshit, because otherwise shit was just not fun

>>94253087
>6 sessions at level 1
Fuck me, anon, even the bitchiest of DMs don't usually drag that shit out past two, three at the absolute most. Hell, you'll usually hit second level by the end of the first session.

>>94253311
Shouldn't it be way faster to level without XP because the narrative breakpoints are practically arbitrary?

>>94253311
>100 sessions
I don't believe you.

>>94249251
A good ruling for that would be if the attack would hit the target, but doesn’t because of the glass, then the glass would absorb an amount of damage equal to its Object HP and the rest would go to the target.

>>94253448
Feels like you don't quite know what arbitrary means.
Since it can just as easily be "way faster" as it can be way slower.

>>94253662
What kind of asshole DM holds levels for 100+ sessions? If you're worried about capping out, homebrew expanded levels past 20.

>>94251882
It's so good. +1 to a casting attribute, you get Advantage on concentration checks, can use single-target spells for attack of opportunities, and don't need a free hand for Somatic.

>>94253735
That's like 2 years without leveling, Jesus Christ

>>94253826
I think I'll take it. I've been kind of split since by my math I'll only get two feats during this campaign, and Skulker + War Caster seems to be what fits my build. The prior should be good for Blindsight in a cast of Darkness, but maybe it's actually not that good? The +1 dex to 19 doesn't get me anything, the Hide feature probably doesn't work, and I should never be revealed by a missed attack anyway because I'm fucking invisible in the dark.

Maybe instead get Elven Accuracy or something else like Lucky, or even an ability score increase to help with my spells (WIS and CHA are 14 and 13, and INT is only 8). Maybe pick Blind Fighting as a fighting style, then get Two-Weapon with one level in Fighter?

I need advice.

My players have some nocs traveling with them, and want to train them in a couple skills.
I really don't like the xge rules for this, so I'm thinking of brewing something like
>training requires downtime and gold
>there's a cap on how many skills you can train, and these require a monetary upkeep, otherwise the npc gets "rusty"

Reasonable? Anyone got a better resource/idea?

>>94254878
What do they plan to use these skills for? In combat? Downtime crafting?

>>94254889
One player is funmaxxing with an awakened hawk, he wants to teach it stupid shit like firing single-shot flintlock weapons.
The other is trying to gear up his bro from a bounty-guild, armor prof for now, but he hasn't been subtle about looking for infinite money-glitches either.

It's a downtime heavy campaign, gritty realism.

>>94248737
>I assume you're using 2014 rules? In which case yes you'd need an open hand to cast spells with a somatic component unless you have War Caster or you're casting a spell with both a Material and Somatic component in which case you could use the Material Component hand as the Somatic Component hand.
If your spell focus counts as a material component and it's a weapon, does that cover the somatic requirement?

File: 1563059581806.jpg (76 KB, 736x917)

76 KB JPG

Is there a case for making fighting with a weapon in one hand and dual wielding separate fighting styles or would it just make sense to lump both under a "duelist" type of fighting style?

I'm leaning on the latter because I'm on the idea that some general abilities that could apply to a duelist could be used for both ways of fighting.

Who had the bright idea of removing hybrid races? What im supposed to use if X character is the kid of an elf and a human? Or god forgive an orc and a human?

>>94255027
Make something up for it. It's not as if half races had anything interesting going for them as a character option aside from being an aesthetic feature.

File: 22352623.png (623 KB, 532x454)

623 KB PNG

>>94255017
Fighting using artificial weapons is gay. One should only use their own natural weapons.

File: 1478489943905.jpg (389 KB, 800x1132)

389 KB JPG

>>94255044
I don't disagree. All Martials should have unarmed die progression like the Monk while the Monk can do vastly more with unarmed strikes. Changing damage types should be a minimum because what kung-fu movies have you watched where the martial artist couldn't finger stab people or use tiger claw/leopard style/eagle style/whatever the fuck animal style?

>>94255017
Duelist makes a shield build less garbage. You could add some new shit if you want, but that's how it is now.

>>94253466
I played two five hour sessions a week for over two years. We leveled up three times, and only hit 20 near the end.

>>94254966
ONLY if the spell has a Material Component that can be covered by a spellcasting focus such as Fireball.
>Example) You are a Swords Bard who has a Shield (Assume you got proficiency from a multiclass or feat) equipped and a Rapier. You can cast Bane (V,S.M) without needing to drop your Rapier since it has Somatic and Material Components. However, you cannot cast Cure Wounds (V,S) because it doesn't have a Material Component for you to use your Rapier as a focus for so you cannot meet the Somatic Component requirement.
Again its annoying but its how it is. Get War Caster to avoid this.


Using the 2024 Rules are in a weird limbo with this right now. The phrase "Free Hand" Appears in the 2024 PHB several times- like in the Material Component rules- but interestingly in the Somatic Components rules they just say the word "Hand" which might imply that you could perform any Somatic Component even if both of your hands are full, you just need hands to do it. But the problem with that is that War Caster still exists and has the same Somatic Component with weapons and shields thing so its likely an error in the Somatic Component Rules.

>>94255027
Use half elf from the 2014 PHB and burn crawford's house down

>>94255027
Just use the old backgrounds.

>>94255017
>Is there a case for making fighting with a weapon in one hand and dual wielding separate fighting styles or would it just make sense to lump both under a "duelist" type of fighting style?
I fail to see how they're related at all. At best, it would be like Renaissance fencers using parry daggers, where the "off hand" weapon would be a parry tool to support the main weapon.

>>94255027
If you're strictly using 2024 PHB stuff then you'd play an Elf or Orc and call them a Half-Elf/Orc just as if you were playing a Halfling + Elf you'd play an Elf or Halfling with Elven or Halfling traits.
If you can use older book content then simply do what the 2024 PHB suggests you do- and just play that species but use the 2024 Background rules for ASI stats and not the base species.

>>94255294
when they describe performing somatic components, the hand is not free, it is performing somatic components.
you can’t perform them with a free hand because the attosecond you begin the motion your hand is no longer free.

>>94255257
Since you started at level 17, that isn't that surprising

>>94253032
Milestone leveling is extremely variable. It can be one level per session, or twenty sessions per level.

File: 1651360108082.gif (434 KB, 200x198)

434 KB GIF

If you have light/nick dual weapons, Extra Attack, and Fighter's action surge, can you attack six fucking times in one turn?

>>94255968
Yes.

File: Spellcasting Focus Somati(...).png (192 KB, 440x498)

192 KB PNG

>>94255763
That would be hilarious if that was how that worked. Couldn't cast spells ever if it was that way.

>>94255968
At level 5, yes
Each attack action is Light+Light. With action surge, that becomes 4 attacks.
Then you get the free attack from Nick and the BA attack from dual wielder for 6 attacks.

>>94255968
Sometimes, you just need to hit a guy a lot.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/iRn_GukpToI?feature=share

>>94255294
>Somatic.
>A spellcaster must use at least one of their hands to perform these movements.
>Material.
>The spellcaster must have a hand free to access them, but it can be the same hand used to perform Somatic components, if any.
I don't see the issue. There's no implication that you can't perform somatic components with the hand you are holding a spell focus in if the spell doesn't require it. It straight up says you can do somatic components with it. Meanwhile, Warcaster ONLY benefits shield bearers outside their turn. Otherwise, stow and draw your weapon as a free action, or Attack Action to draw.

File: guilherme-viana-2.jpg (560 KB, 1920x1847)

560 KB JPG

The Darkness Spell
>“Darkvision can't see through it, and nonmagical light can't illuminate it…If any of this spell's area overlaps with an area of Bright Light or Dim Light created by a spell of level 2 or lower, that other spell is dispelled.”
The Hallow Spell
>"Darkness. Darkness fills the area. Normal light, as well as magical light created by spells of a level lower than this spell, can't illuminate the area."
The Hunger of Hadar spell
>"A 20-foot-radius Sphere of Darkness appears...No light, magical or otherwise, can illuminate the area"
Summon Fey Tricksy spell
>"“The spirit fills a 10-foot Cube within 5 feet of it with magical Darkness, which lasts until the end of its next turn.”
Sage Advice
>“Does all magical darkness block darkvision? Magical darkness blocks darkvision only if the rules text for a particular instance of darkness says it does”

So with all of these mechanics together- RAW Tricksy Fey's magical darkness can be seen through with regular darkvision and since it lacks the whole 'Non-Magical Light cannot illuminate this' part regular light can illumiate the darkness like a torch or sunlight...

Obviously this isn't intended but its just funny that they missed this part.

>>94256101
That is RAW, and it's why I hate 5e rules interactions so much. No consistency, nothing to extrapolate, it's just whatever hole in the rules JC decides to justify with his sage advice.

>>94256069
The issue is that War Caster says
>Somatic Components. You can perform the Somatic components of spells even when you have weapons or a Shield in one or both hands."
This text is unnecessary if you can perform the Somatic Components of spells if your hands aren't free as a base rule- it doesn't matter if you're holding a focus or not. If you assume the Somatic rule is saying you don't need to have a free hand to perform a Somatic component for any spell (even spells that lack material components, like the Shield spell for example) then War Caster's somatic components bullet is doing nothing since you could already cast spells with Somatic components while wielding a shield and weapon or two weapons.

>>94256007
So without dual wielder, you don't get 6 attacks per turn?

Natural language combined with flavor text, specific beats general, and a completely arbitrary need to have things stated is the most dogshit way to formulate rules.

>>94256148
says you

>>94256136
I assume you must have either a free hand or hold a spell focus to cast a spell with somatic components. Warcaster allows you to ignore this; cast a spell with somatic component while effectively having neither a free hand or a spell focus. How good is that in practice? Almost completely trivial, because of stowing, drawing, and component pouch. It's the feat that negates having to resort to equipping and non-eqipping autism. So the only use is for a shield bearer wanting to use a reaction spell, while keeping the possibility of an opportunity attack open. Yeah. Stop jerking this feat off like it's a tax.

>>94256166
and he's right
although "specific beats general" can be practical

>>94256142
Nick allows you to make one extra attack as part of the Attack Action once per turn, so Action Surge doesn't refresh it if that's the sticking point you're having
>When you make the extra attack of the Light property, you can make it as part of the Attack action instead of as a Bonus Action. *You can make this extra attack only once per turn.*
Some other consistent source of a Bonus Action attack that works with a Nick weapon would also work, but Dual Wielder is the easiest to get access to.

>>94256189
I'm not saying this is a feat tax (Though War Caster is strong enough as is to get it anyways), what I'm saying is that if you are reading the Somatic component rules as "Not needing a free hand to cast them" then that part of the War Caster feat shouldn't exist.
>I assume you must have either a free hand or hold a spell focus to cast a spell with somatic components.
I agree, unless in regards to the Spell Focus part you mean any spell even ones that lack Material Components, in which case I'd disagree the spell would need a Material Component to use the same hand to use a Somatic Component like the rule says. So you couldn't have a Shield & Wand in your hands and cast Burning Hands but you could cast Color Spray.

>>94256192
>specific beats general can be practical
I'd agree, but there's an issue. Which specific beats what specific? Welcome to a thousand corner cases. Don't worry, we got an official unofficial dipshit to dodge those questions for you.

>>94256244
>the spell would need a Material Component to use the same hand to use a Somatic Component like the rule says.
Where is this stated?

>>94256290
Page 237 of the PHB: Material Components
>"The spellcaster must have a hand free to access them, but it can be the same hand used to perform Somatic components, if any."

>>94256290
I mean, it doesn't matter with component pouch in practice. Exception being the "shield + reaction spell + opportunity attack available" situation. Still curious.

>>94256142
As the other anon said, it's needed for the BA attack. It's still a crazy attack quantity for level 5, and makes dual-wielding paladin one of the top builds now.

>>94256290
Also, sage advice backs this up here >>94255999

>>94256333
paladin is a nonbo with nu-smites

>>94256310
And you take that to read you can't perform somatic components with a spell focus if the spell doesn't require material components? No way.

>>94256358
The idea is that you don't smite when dual wielding. Rather, you use Divine Favor because it's 1d4 per attack without concentration, and then stack that with other bonus damage dice per hit. Those scale massively when you can pump out 4 attacks per round.

>>94256341
Thanks, I hate it.

>>94256364
>And you take that to read you can't perform somatic components with a spell focus if the spell doesn't require material components?
Correct yes, this is exactly how it was in 2014 as well.

2014 Material Component Rule
>"A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell’s material components—or to hold a spellcasting focus—but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components."
2024 Material Components Rules
>">"The spellcaster must have a hand free to access them, but it can be the same hand used to perform Somatic components, if any."
See Sage Advice here >>94255999 that clarifies this is how it works.

Like I've been saying its annoying. Yes you can attempt to ignore it by dropping (which in 2024 is unequipping an item thus would likely be an Item Interaction) or sheathing one of the items in your hand to cast the spell, but you couldn't draw it until next turn.

>>94256388
aight, makes sense

>>94256231
Without Dual Wielder but with Extra Attack, couldn't you go
>Attack->Nick Attack->Attack(Extra Attack)->Light Weapon Bonus Action attack (combo'd with your Extra Attack attack)->Action Surge->Attack-->Extra Attack?
For seven attacks on one turn, without having Dual Wielder?

Dual Wielder's advantage is that you don't need to use a Light weapon on the bonus attack, so for example with a Longsword you could use the Versatile trait to make your bonus attack as a 1d10.

Also is my reading of Nick correct that you don't need to actually make the second attack with the Nick weapon itself?
>When you make the extra attack of the Light property, you can make it as part of the Attack action instead of as a Bonus Action. You can make this extra attack only once per turn.

Unlike every other Weapon Mastery, Nick's wording doesn't say that you must make the attack "with this weapon". In which case, it's essentially a general buff - As in, you can attack with a Scimitar, then take the Nick attack with a Shortsword, even though the Shortsword itself doesn't have Nick.

>>94256405
I appreciate you laying this out, and I get it. Still disagree with the interpretation, because it's so heavily dependant on sage head canon.

File: Opportunity Attack + War (...).png (116 KB, 1358x391)

116 KB PNG

>>94256317
Component Pouches are the best for that reason. They leave your hand free since you don't wield it you just have it on your person so you can access it. Shield or Weapon + Component Pouch is best combat style for casters.
2024 War Caster is still incredible and you should get it anyways- being able to make Opportunity Attacks against your allies now means you can buff them with Reactive Spell. Rogue ran past you? Haste! Injured Fighter ran past you? Cure Wounds! Suicidal party member about to run into danger? Polymorph them!

>>94256455
>Light Weapon Bonus Action attack (combo'd with your Extra Attack attack)
You already use that with the Nick Action. Dual Wielder gives you an additional ability to use the bonus action to make an attack not intrinsically tied to the Light property while dual wielding.

>>94256455
>Also is my reading of Nick correct that you don't need to actually make the second attack with the Nick weapon itself?
>In which case, it's essentially a general buff - As in, you can attack with a Scimitar, then take the Nick attack with a Shortsword, even though the Shortsword itself doesn't have Nick.
Your reading is correct, but its been heavily contentious since this whole Nick Mastery property has been shown in the book. Technically you don't even need to attack with or wield the Scimitar in the first place to use the Nick Mastery you could be wielding two Shortswords and still get the Nick Mastery's effective 'General Buff' as I've been calling it.

You could go even further beyond and dual wield using a Shield + two weapons with weapon juggling/Equiping and Unequipping weapons. Like so:

>Fighter is wielding Shortsword A and a Shield. They have Shortsword B sheathed. They also have Extra Attack, Dual Wielder feat, Mastery Property for Shortswords (Vex), and Daggers (Nick)
>Character's turn
>Action: Attack 1 with Shortsword A. Sheathe Shortsword A. Attack 2, Draw Shortsword B and attack with Shortsword B. Light + Nick Mastery attack with Shortsword B.
>Bonus Action: Enhanced Dual Wielding, Attack with Shortsword B.
>Action Surge
>Action: Attack with Shortsword B two more times
Total number of attacks 6 and you kept a shield on this whole time so you could stack Dueling and Two Weapon Fighting when you get high enough level to get both.

>Think about running stuff
>Get uninterested in it just thinking up a few starting sessions
>Think about playing stuff
>Get uninterested halfway into character creation
Have you ever been burned out on tabletop rpgs?

File: Dual Wielder 2024.png (199 KB, 1363x825)

199 KB PNG

>>94256580
Maximum silly time, depending on how you read Dual Wielder's Quick Draw part this might be possible too:
>Be level 20 Fighter
>Wielding Shortsword A, equipped with Shield, and have Shortsword B sheathed.
>Has Dueling Fighting Style, Two-Weapon Fighting Style, and the Dual Wielder Feat, and Weapon Mastery with Shortswords (Vex) and Daggers (Nick)
>Action: Take the Attack Action
>Attack 1 with Shortsword A, Sheathe Shortsword A draw Shortsword B (Quick Draw)
>Attack 2 with Shortsword B, Sheathe Shortsword B draw Shortsword A (Quick Draw)
>Attack 3 with Shortsword A, Sheathe Shortsword A Draw Shortsword B (Quick Draw)
>Attack 4 with Shortsword B, Sheathe Shortsword B draw Shortsword A (Quick Draw)
>Light + Nick Attack with Shortsword A
>Bonus Action: Enhanced Dual Wield
>Attack Shortsword A
>Action Surge: Action Take the Attack action
>Attack 1 with Shortsword A, Sheathe Shortsword A draw Shortsword B (Quick Draw)
>Attack 2 with Shortsword B, Sheathe Shortsword B draw Shortsword A (Quick Draw)
>Attack 3 with Shortsword A, Sheathe Shortsword A Draw Shortsword B (Quick Draw)
>Attack 4 with Shortsword B, Sheathe Shortsword B draw Shortsword A (Quick Draw)
>End Turn
You'd have advantage on all attacks except the first one due to Vex + Studied Attacks, you'd be adding dueling and twf for each of these as well. If the target is still alive next turn, you get advantage on all your Shortsword attacks against them until they die.

DON'T DO THIS, I will manifest at your table and beat you tiny hammers if you do this.

File: 1535061129869.gif (520 KB, 302x270)

520 KB GIF

>>94256510
>You already use that with the Nick Action.
Yes, you used a Light weapon attack combo'd from your first attack. But in fact the Light description says nothing about only using that once per turn - Only the Nick feature does. Instead, the Light attack is only gated by your access to a Bonus Action, the number of Attacks you make - Specifically it says that when you take the Attack action on your turn *and attack with a Light weapon*, you can make the Light weapon attack.

Meaning, that if you make an Attack action, attack with your Light Nick weapon, roll that bonus Light attack into Nick's effect so that it's made at the same time as your first attack, then attack AGAIN with Extra Attack, you can still trigger the Light Bonus Action attack because you just attacked again, and still have a free bonus action to use it with.

So, for example, if you attack with a Scimitar, that attack can trigger Nick, allowing you to attack with a Shortsword at the same time. Then you can attack with an Extra Attack, triggering the Light attack again, and using the Light Attack as your Bonus Action.

This is especially the correct interaction because the Extra Attack feature says that you *can* attack twice instead of once when taking the attack action. Meaning it is a different attack, and you can choose not to do it, so it should absolutely trigger the Light attack.

>>94256510
Reading, I think with Action Surge specifically you might be able to get away with not having Dual Wielder. Nick property allows you to make the Light property's Bonus Action attack as part of the Attack Action, so that instance is tied up. Action Surge allows you to take the Attack Action a second time, which is the trigger for the Light one. So it wouldn't be
>Attack->Nick Attack->Attack(Extra Attack)->Light Weapon Bonus Action attack (combo'd with your Extra Attack attack)->Action Surge->Attack-->Extra Attack?
but
>Attack->Nick Attack->Attack(Extra Attack)->Action Surge->Attack-->Extra Attack->Light Weapon Bonus Action attack

>>94256690
"An attack" and "the Attack Action" are separate things, Extra Attack isn't a second Attack Action, it's a second attack as part of the same Attack Action, meaning the Light property will have already been triggered by Nick for that Attack Action. Action Surge however is a complete second action, which you use to take the Attack Action, so I think that might work.

>>94256705
That's plausible. I don't think it would break things too much, either, since that just means one extra attack per encounter.

File: Dual Wielder JC.png (62 KB, 1277x359)

62 KB PNG

>>94256705
>Attack->Nick Attack->Attack(Extra Attack)->Action Surge->Attack-->Extra Attack->Light Weapon Bonus Action attack
This is how it's supposed to work

File: 1652142328785.png (184 KB, 520x308)

184 KB PNG

>>94256736
>"An attack" and "the Attack Action" are separate things, Extra Attack isn't a second Attack Action,
That is correct. But the Light property states that
>When you take the Attack action on your turn and attack with a Light weapon, you can make one extra attack as a bonus action later on the same turn.

Let's break this down.
>When you take the Attack action on your turn
This condition is fulfilled in the combo I described. You took the Attack action on your turn
>and make an attack with a Light weapon
Note the "and" and lowercase use of attack. This is saying that taking the Attack action, and making an attack, are two distinct things. IF you CHOOSE to make a SECOND attack(little a) with the Extra Attack feature, that second attack is distinct from the first one. Meaning that if you do this, it fulfills the "and make an attack with a Light weapon" condition.
>you can make one extra attack as a bonus action later on the same turn.
If you use Nick, an extra attack is not made as a Bonus Action later on the same turn, rather one is made simultaneously with your first attack. Meaning that if another attack occurs, and you still have a Bonus Action available, it fulfills the conditions for activating the Light Bonus Attack.

Remember, it's only Nick itself that says that it can only be used once per turn. Light has no such restrictions - It's only restricted by the number of attacks (not Attack Actions, attacks) you make, and the availability of a Bonus Action.

I see no reason RAW why this would not be the case. Again, the language of Extra Attack clearly states that it is a distinct attack in and of itself. If you take it to be the case that it cannot trigger the Light property, it should also be the case that it must be used with the same to-hit roll and damage roll as your first Attack Action attack, since you're insisting that they are the same.

>>94256608
>think about running stuff
>put up ad
>talk to lots of potential players
>narrow down to 4-5 really seem to match my style
>they all have years of experience and been in bazillion games while I have only 2 years and 1 campaign
>impostor syndrome

What could I replace Thieves Cant with, if my rogue doesnt follow that sort of theme?

Gust Cantrip
>One Medium or smaller creature that you choose must succeed on a Strength saving throw or be pushed up to 5 feet away from you.
Elementalism
>Beckon Air. You create a breeze strong enough to ripple cloth, stir dust, rustle leaves, and close open doors and shutters, all in a 5-foot Cube. Doors and shutters being held open by someone or something aren't affected.
Aww no way to push people with the new 'Gust' anymore.

File: 08-002.aasimar-wizard.png (694 KB, 1700x897)

694 KB PNG

Spellcasting with Somatic and Material is easy to understand if you see pic related direct from the 2024 PHB "Casting Spells - Components" section.
When you need to focus on a Material or Spellcasting Focus, it leaves your hand and floats thus leaving the hand that was holding said material or focus now free to perform the Somatic component.
If a spell has a Somatic component but no Material component, you would still be holding the Focus and your hand is not available to perform the Somatic gestures

File: Daylight Art.png (4.03 MB, 2225x1440)

4.03 MB PNG

>>94257237
That Aasimar is likely using a component pouich as well.
>An aasimar Wizard uses a crystal material component to focus the magic of Cone of Cold
>Cone of Cold Components: V, S, M (a small crystal or glass cone)
Though a crystal can also be an Arcane Focus so..

A more interesting image: This is a Cleric or Paladin casting Daylight in the 2024 PHB. Daylight is a Verbal and Somatic component spell only yet they seem to be casting it through a Holy Symbol (I assume) which isn't possible as far as the rules go. They even have a weapon in their other hand which would stop them from having a free hand. Maybe they've got War Caster.
Love how Astarian's in this picture and unfazed by this.

>>94257194
any tool or language prof

>>94257237
i doubt some half ai-generated flavor art is meant to follow the precise rules they had in mind at the moment where they spent 5min barely designing them

File: Chromatic Orb art.png (5.37 MB, 2225x1440)

5.37 MB PNG

>>94257325
Another interesting one is the Chromatic Orb art
>Chromatic Orb
>Components: V, S, M (a diamond worth 50+ GP)
I'd assume the art is showing a neat case of a mage who has implanted a 50+ GP diamond onto a wand or rod and can simply cast Chromatic Orb through the wand/rod/diamond that way.

>>94257425
Why is 5e art so ugly.

File: Web of Fire.gif (2.39 MB, 600x338)

2.39 MB GIF

>>94257482

>>94257237
No such logical consistency within the rules, anon. It was clarified in sage advice that a wizard could perform somatic components with a hand holding an orb. If the spell lacks a material component, however, then this can no longer be done. Why? Because you can't extrapolate anything. You must ignore all possible rules interactions that make sense, and say they just don't work because the book didn't specify it.

>>94257425
>>94257325
>>94257237
buy an add, hasbro bro.

>>94257761
this system is basically designed like a bad database where no references work
ie made by idiots

>>94257425
literally a fucking diamond built into the wand, you cock.

>>94257964
How is the fight against the windmills going?

>>94250123
So Im in a room, and theres a hallway to another room.
I throw a smoke grenade into the hallway (Fog Cloud), but it doesnt actually cover me.
The enemy can see clearly through the hallway?

>>94258041
The effect of Fog Cloud only covers its area of effect, i.e. everything in its radius is heavily obscured. You want to be in the heavily obscured area.
Whether other areas are heavily obscured is an on-the-spot ruling. Can't get around these when it comes to vision, as the rules can't cover everything. But in any case, you want to be in the heavily obscured area.

>>94258041
Do they have line of sight? If their line of sight goes through an obscured area, it's insane to argue that you aren't obscured. Eitherway, they attack you with disadvantage because you are obscured - and cancel it out with advantage, because you are blinded while obscured. So it does effectively nothing in a normal scenario. They can't target you with most spells still, but the disadv./adv. cancel is the crux of the issue for me.

Swarmkeeper ranger with shillelaghs. For rp purposes I’m kind of considering some Druid Levels but not opposed to staying in ranger. Campaign will end around 11-13 dm says. 3 levels in sporekeeper a good idea to push my damage up a bit. I don’t use hunters mark. Most combat goes, turn 1 CC spell, shillelaghs, turn 2 bonk bonus action jump spell. Dm is throwing more combat at us so I will end up using jump a bit less now and my bonus action is often open.

I could just go straight ranger and eventually get PAM I suppose.

>>94256388
>Divine Favor because it's 1d4 per attack without concentration,
It requires concentration, doesn't it? Have they buffed it in 5.5e?

How could I use two buildings to hint the direction for the next city the players should discover?
My idea was to use pinholes that can be found on such buildings, but the problem is that just one of them would be enough to pinpoint the right direction, thus making the other obsolete. The city is in the middle of a dense forest, if it matters.

>>94258484
Look, I don't want to dishearten you, anon. Do what looks fun. Ranger didn't get much love, but Swarmkeeper is cool. Can't recommend Spore Druid to anyone, still. The action activation, and duration tied to the THP, makes a truly abysmal ability. And imo, druid doesn't really work unless you go all in (1 dip is fine).

File: dbnafk6-cad5df72-a151-4d9(...).png (588 KB, 621x619)

588 KB PNG

Best wizard feats after 20 int, rescon, war caster, lucky & alert?

>>94258566
Depends on how you get to place these buildings. You could have the buildings form a triangle, either with a third building in the city, or have the city be the center. Any geometric shape will do. Better to lore drop it, as a secret that they discover, with the promise of somthing the PCs wants.

>>94258578
Cartomancer.

>>94258599
There are basically two sort of temples in this mock city, although I can introduce others if needed, and the goal is for them to hint the direction of the real one, which is deeper in the wood. I was trying to find a way to achieve that without introducing maps, images or texts. The path could be a secret passage, in which case your triangle idea works, or anything else.

>>94258628
Just don't be caught up in being subtle about it. Find as many ways as possible to hint at it, and eventually just state it. Maybe they get it immediately, maybe they won't get it even after being told point blank. Puzzles should be optional by design, for a bonus. It's bad form to only have one solution.

>>94258651
I'm not gonna be subtle about it, that's for sure, and even if the players do not understand it, a rival team will; my problem right now is the design itself of the "puzzle", as I like this idea but cannot visualize it right now. With only two temples, that is.

2024 warlock looks like a lot of fun.
I don’t even know where to start.
Pact of the blade for sure but what subclass. Genie is kind of cool. Undead looks like it could be kind of fun from an rp perspective. Fathomless has a nice gimmick to it. Archfey is basically night crawler.
Fiend is meh. Hurl through hell looks fun but games don’t go that far often.

I kind of want to mix warlock and valor bard. Not for the eb spam potential but nick combo that scales all off cha.

What’s better
>Valor bard 6 warlock x
Cha scythe, true strike on another light weapon.
>warlock 5 paladin 2 warlock x
Cha scythe. Shillelaghs club.

I could play as an elf and get a double bladed scimitar. Dm is all about that shit.

>>94258568
Yeah I know. 2024 wasn’t the best to ranger but swarm keeper with shillelaghs and high wisdom just works out the box. Especially because we running a mix of modules. At level 5 the build was pretty much in place. So now I’m just thinking ways to make it a little stronger/creative. I’ll just stick to 1-2 levels in Druid for rp purposes then and stick the rest to ranger. I’ll at least get conjure animals that way.

Give me an item name and I will make for you an item.

>>94259938
The Separator.

>>94259938
Valfalk

File: Yugi.png (474 KB, 555x555)

474 KB PNG

>>94259938
Deck of Duel Monsters

Is it in bad taste to choose a subclass if you think it'll be good in a certain campaign? For example I'm in a Ghosts of Saltmarsh campaign, so would Fathomless Warlock be too OP?

By the same token, is there a consensus on choosing multiple multiclasses? I thought I was set with my build, but looking it over I'm considering switching out Sorcerer for Warlock (was going to take Eldrich Magic as a background feat, but just going Warlock and taking the same Pact Magic options there while freeing up a feat slot might be better), but I was still interested in going Sorcerer later.

For example, four levels in Ranger, five levels in Warlock, and three in Sorcerer.

File: 1683298773259548.jpg (218 KB, 600x600)

218 KB JPG

Hello! I am brand new to the game and was recommended The Lost Mines of Phandelver to run for my friends. Is it included in the "Phandelver and Below" book?

Is there other recommendations for first time adventures?

>>94260058
>Is it bad taste to make a character for a certain campaign?
No.
>consensus on choosing multiple multiclasses?
You can multiclass every class, if you have the ability scores for it. If you want a tasteful limit, it's multiclassing twice. That's usually a good number, anyhow.

how does 5e compare to previous editions of D&D in terms of character fantasy?

>>94260119
How do you mean?

>>94260058
That's dumb, that's like saying you shouldn't be able to play as a Cleric or Paladin in CoS.

Nobody cares how many times you multiclass so long as it makes sense narratively.

>>94260058
There's nothing wrong with playing a character who's actually suited for the adventure in question. Frankly, I'd prefer it. Though I've never seen a "build" that required more than three distinct classes.

>>94260058
I'd argue that someone with those talents would be more drawn to that kind of adventure to begin with, be more likely to be in the area where an on-theme campaign takes place.

File: Screenshot_20241027_11405(...).jpg (487 KB, 928x841)

487 KB JPG

>>94260007

How do you guys deal with playing with a person who is shit tactically? Like refuse to take any risk or help out with his abilities to save them Incase something happens to him pretty fucking annoying

>>94260278
Are they trying to be tactical or are they deliberately roleplaying as a retard?

>>94260119
>AD&D
Lot of weird rules. Players are less attached to characters when they start out. D&D has its roots in wargames. It's more gritty, "complicated", methodical, random, and lethal. Fighters and Clerics are strong early. Wizards start weak, with d4 hit points and 1 spell, and end up one of the strongest classes. Thieves are skill monkies, level faster, but have less potential. Prestige classes are difficult to qualify for, like Paladin and Bard.
>3e / 3.5e
A ton of splat books for customization: feats, magic items, races, spells, etc. A broken mess, essentially. The class fantasy still holds true, but it's less tied to the grognard style of play.
>4e
Takes inspiration from MMO's like warcraft, having four roles: Defender (tank), Leader (healer), Striker (dps), and Controller (cc). Everyone had at-will powers, encounter powers, and daily powers. This made every class feel similar. Spellcasters don't feel like they have the same versatility they had in other editions. Fighter is one of the strongest classes, which is rare for D&D. Strikers end up taking over the game. Resting is trivial, and fully heals characters. Resource management has been big in all editions, but this is the most 'gamey' of the editions.
>5e
Streamlined. Harkens back to earlier editions, bringing back vancian magic. You can cast any spell memorized, in any order. Bigger focus on RP, character arcs, and "story". It's rare to have a character die. Characters end up feeling more powerful, often critiqued to be super heroes. There is a clear disparity between martial characters, and spellcasters in terms of what they are capable of and their versatility. Less customization, as a result of drawn out releases for source books.

>>94260278
I bring it up as a group discussion. Offer suggestions, like: make an adventurer that wants to help the party. If they can't meet this criteria, your group has no business bringing them on board. Either they help out, make a new character, or find a different table.

>>94260278
Ask him what his deal is, and question why he joins adventures when clearly he has no intention of ever actually doing anything on them.

>>94260070
>Is it included in the "Phandelver and Below" book?
Sort of but it's a revised version that leads into another adventure. Classic Phandelver is a good first time adventure.

File: Screenshot_20241027_12415(...).jpg (200 KB, 928x363)

200 KB JPG

>>94260033

>>94259938

The Hilt of the Elements

>>94260179
>Nobody cares how many times you multiclass so long as it makes sense narratively.
My character is a Drow who worships Eilistraee and Vhaeraun. That's why I picked Gloom Stalker as my Ranger subclass, and wanted to pick Lunar Sorcerer as my multiclass.

I really like the Warlock Eldritch Invocation options to the point of picking up Eldritch Adept for my background feat, but I can't think of a way narratively for my character to go Warlock. I'm not that familiar with DnD lore, but I don't think those two Drow gods count as Fiends or anything else that Warlocks make pacts with. So while Fathomless would be the best choice for our campaign it's right out, and while Hexblade is like a maybe from what I've read I don't think Vhaeraun has any actual connection to the Shadowfell, just that other god who sounds exactly like him.

We're starting at level 3, and will probably only go to level 12, so if I could just pick anything with zero narrative consideration I'd probably go
>2 levels in Ranger, 1 in Warlock, Warlock starting so I don't need to get Eldritch Adept and can go with something else
>3rd and 4th levels in Ranger for Gloom Stalker and a feat
>2nd-5th levels in Warlock for the 5th level pacts like Extra Attack
>3 levels in Sorcerer for Lunar Sorcerer

Though honestly looking at the Warlock Invocation table, even just 2 levels in Warlock would be fine to let me pick up 3 Invocations, so I could get Devil's Sight, Blade, and Tome.

The only issue progression-wise is that I've already picked up Eldrich Adept as a background feat to give me access to Tome, and I don't want to just waste my background feat.

Actually thinking about it now, since EA allows me to swap it's Invocation on gaining a level, could I not take 2 levels in Warlock, then swap EA to Lessons of the First Ones to gain an different Origin feat?

It's a repeatable Invocation choice, right? Do you lose that chosen Origin feat if you choose a different one? Or can you get multiple?

>>94260753
>if I could just pick anything with zero narrative consideration
Then do it. There is no merit to policing what makes sense for someone's character. However you choose to express their power ups, that's a big part of the fun of this game.

File: noinfiniteclonespanic.gif (771 KB, 498x331)

771 KB GIF

>simulacrum
>It uses the game statistics of the original creature at the time of casting, except it is a Construct, its Hit Point maximum is half as much, and it can't cast this spell.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

>>94260866
Just have the simulacrum cast Wish, and replicate the effects of the Simulacrum spell.

>>94260866
What are you crying about? Any other reading breaks the verse at level 17. The DM would have to be a dipshit to entertain it for more than 5 minutes.
>>94260881
You can't replicate Simulacrum either.
>If you cast this spell again, any currently active duplicates you created with this spell are instantly destroyed.
The norm was to count any Simulacrum you create as "you" for the purpose of this text. Guess what? It's still absurdly broken.

>>94261013
Is it? The simulacrum is by definition not you.

>>94261031
Let me run you through the possiblilities.
>A. The wizard makes a simulacrum, and it wishes for a simulacrum ad infinitum. The whole verse is now filled with copies of the wizard.
>B. The DM comes to his fucking senses and limits the wizard to 1 Simulacrum, period.
Option A, even if RAW, is not playable. Option B is barely even playable to begin with.

File: 1459735976422.gif (1.95 MB, 480x320)

1.95 MB GIF

>>94260794
But making a character narratively is about as fun as making one mechanically. I want my choices to make sense with my background as best I can.

However, the two-level Warlock dip isn't that divergent, especially since unlike the subclasses, the vague "voice in the shadows" from prior to when your patron is revealed is loose enough for me to justify it.

The only thing I'm concerned about now is the multiclass being so fucking broke that the DM will ban it.
>have two levels in Ranger, one in Sorcerer
>pick up level 1 Warlock at first level up, gain the Pact of the Tome (which I already had, so nothing changes) as a Warlock Invocation, swap EA to Pact of the Blade
>on second level up, take another Warlock level, take Pact of the Blade, Pact of the Tome (in other words keep what you currently have) and Lessons of the First Ones as your third Invocation.
>also take Lessons of the First Ones at the same level via Eldrich Adept - It's a repeatable feat, so you can take it twice via the feature and your feat
>immediately take Tough for maximum HP gain value while leveling,
>every following level up, take two more Origin feats until you have every other Origin feat
>at two gains per level, you only need to level four fucking times to have every one-time bonus Origin feat, at which point you can just keep taking Skilled and Magic Initiate until you have proficiency in every skill and tool and infinite free level 1 spell casts and cantrips
Jesus Fucking Christ.

>>94261110
I don't think that's broken. You're not going for consistent damage, burst damage, aoe damage, don't have high level spells, and generally lack a gameplan altogether. Your DM may think a bundle of stats is broken, if they lack context for what builds can do, but that's specific to each table.

>>94261110
yeah you will have all that & terribly low stats & 0 high level spells

>>94260316
You can fix melee characters by giving them a extra damage die on a crit

File: Screenshot_20241027_14091(...).jpg (192 KB, 948x718)

192 KB JPG

>>94260039

>>94261403
I'd say higher crit range, not extra damage. Maybe a little extra damage too at higher levels.

>>94261466
Holy Ra! Real monsters!?

>>94261490
>>94261490
Every game Ive been in that's what the dm does a extra damage die for ALL melee weapon characters including the baddies on a crit and it seems to work well

>>94261555
This extra damage is a bit vague. If it's the half-orc racial, that's not statistically significant. Still feels nice, so props for that. If you're doing max damage on melee crits, that is more notable for specific classes.

>>94261198
It feels broken to me. Even in the case of a late start where I only begin accumulating Lessons of the First Ones Origin feats at character level 5 (when it could start as early as level 3 multiclassing Warlock and level 2 going straight Warlock), a lot of the Origin feats are just amazing utility.

For example the cumulative HP bonus from Tough alone is great. Getting it at level 5 is already +12 HP right there, and it remains good to get even at higher levels due to the "twice your character level+2" part of it.

Getting Skilled can give you proficiency in everything very quickly, getting Lucky will give you advantage on tons of rolls. Alert means you can win initiative most of the time, and save your party sometimes. Savage Attacker will guarantee almost all your attacks are good damage.

Sure, maybe Tavern Brawler or Musician are whatever, but you can get a lot.

>>94261314
>0 high level spells
2 levels Warlock, 5 levels Ranger, 5 (maybe 6 if the campaign goes long enough, or possibly 4 Sorcerer plus 3 Warlock for a subclass there)) levels in Sorcerer should be just fine. In this build I'd have advantage on every fucking attack roll, be invisible constantly, have multiple free casts of spells like Shield, be hitting for four attacks a turn, and have every social/narrative tool/spell/proficiency in the book.

What are the rules on multiclass spell scaling anyway? Ranger is a half-caster and both Sorcerer and Warlock are full casters.

If anything, I'd only need to worry about ability scores. My DEX is already 18, so my only problem is pumping up WIS and CHA through feats so my spells are less likely to be resisted. I may not have great damaging spells, but I can still slap things good in combat and have a bunch of utility.

>>94261592
>What are the rules on multiclass spell scaling?
There's a multiclass table in the core books. You add 1 full level for each full caster, 1/2 rounded down for all half casters, and 1/3 rounded down for AT or EK. That total is your "effective slot level".

File: caster hats.jpg (2.02 MB, 4141x1708)

2.02 MB JPG

What's with high level casters and ridiculous headgear? Do martials have anything equivalent?

File: daw0XaT3EmpDFCjuVNN8pv550(...).jpg (51 KB, 640x437)

51 KB JPG

>>94261845
Pauldrons

>>94261869
Based

>>94261869
He looks like the protagonist of Chex Quest.

>>94255526
Thankfully it has nothing to do with any sort of reaissance nonsense. It's a working name until I can find something generic but not cringe.

>>94258520
They removed the concentration requirement.

>>94261813
If I'm reading the rules right, you're actually supposed to round up for half-casters.
So in that case at character level 12 with 2 Warlock, 5 Ranger, 5 Sorcerer (or any mix of Sorcerer and Warlock there), I'd come up to an effective spell level of 10?

So going by the multiclass caster table, I'd have 4 level 1 spell slots, 3 level 2, 3 level 3, 3 level 4, and 2 level 4 spell slots available. That sounds just fine as far as spellcasting is concerned, I think.

>>94259938
The Gaze of the Wicked

>>94259938
The Adventurers Almanac Monthly: Rune Knights edition!

>>94261813
>>94262137
Depends on if it's 5e or 5.5. 5e Ranger and Paladin round down, Artificer rounds up. 5.5 Ranger and Paladin round up, and Artificer hasn't been reprinted, so use the 5e version, which rounds up. Gave them all Artificer style multiclassing as they get Spellcasting at level 1 in 5.5, which can lead to odd situations with the third casters at certain levels if you round the halfcaster down, causing you to actually lose spell slots (basically amounts to thirdcasters effectively rounding up when single classed, but down when multi, so round down halfcaster 1/thirdcaster x where x isn't divisible by 3)

>>94262137
You are reading the rules correctly. They changed that in the 2024 rules for half casters.

>>94262137
Aren't you limited by the class' level for the spells you can prepare from their spell list?
Like even as Sorc5, you can't picked a 4th level spell even if you have 4th level spell slots because at Sorc5, the class only has up to 3rd level slots
Or am I just totally wrong about how prepared spells work for multiclassing?

>>94262282
You get the spell slots even higher than the spells you can cast that you can still use for upcasting lower leveled spells,

But with Sorcerer, if you have a 4th slot while being Sorc 5 multiclass, you can still pick a 4th level spell in RAW.

File: Screenshot_20241027_16374(...).jpg (362 KB, 949x592)

362 KB JPG

>>94260741

>>94262396
>But with Sorcerer, if you have a 4th slot while being Sorc 5 multiclass, you can still pick a 4th level spell in RAW.
Not even remotely. Look at the rules on multiclassing.

>>94262396
Nah you can’t. Read the multiclass rules around preparing. I had the same thought for my ranger 5 druid 7.
A kind anon corrected me yesterday. Apparently it says “when preparing. Prepare as if single classed”

>>94262762
>>94262769
I believe you're right, but I was reading the Sorc class description as written.

>Whenever that number increases, choose additional Sorcerer spells until the number of spells on your list matches the number in the Sorcerer Features table. The chosen spells must be of a level for which you have spell slots.

File: file.png (187 KB, 853x163)

187 KB PNG

>>94262797
From the PHB

>>94262797
Yes, and as a sorcerer 5 you would only have a 3rd level spell slot. If you follow it as written and only count it in sorcerer levels, it's clearer.
>Dave the Sorcerer 5/Druid 3 has 2 4th level spell slots
>but Dave learns their sorcerer spells as if they were solely a sorcerer 5 and prepares their druid spells as if they were solely a druid 3

File: Screenshot_20241027_17021(...).jpg (561 KB, 939x851)

561 KB JPG

>>94262168

>>94262120
wew, nice

>>94259938
The Pit of A'rum

>>94262814
I appreciate that the actual example is a sorcerer who would have 4th-level slots, thus neatly skewering the entire argument.

I can't figure it out. The new rules look like a Sorcerer can craft a scroll as long as it's a spell they have prepared. They may also use any scroll, so long as that spell is on the sorcerer spell list, yet not personally prepared.

Am I reading this wrong?

>>94260741

Thank you, frien <3

>>94262656

Thanks, friend!

>>94262814
You can't prepare a higher level Sorcerer spell, but you CAN use the higher level spellslot by upcasting a suitable spell. You have the higher level spellslot from your character level, and it can be used AS a higher level slot in certain conditions, you just can't prepare a spell of that level directly.

For example if you have the 2nd level spell Shadow Blade as a 3rd level Sorcerer, but have the character level 6, you can upcast it to be a 3rd level spell with 3d8 damage instead of 2d8 damage, because by the multiclassing rules you have the spellslot to do so.

It's an interesting way of making more use of lower-level spells when multiclassing, rather than keeping to one class and going for only the highest level spells possible.

>>94263066
They also need Arcana and/or Calligrapher's Tools Proficiency, downtime, and gold. So you could spend, like, three weeks to craft 21 scrolls of... I don't know, Burning Hands. Then on level up swap out the Burning Hands from their list of currently Prepared spells, and keep casting that with the scrolls.

>>94263129
And I'm just assuming that means it's fair game for clerics or even paladins too. Is there any ruling on Warlocks making scrolls?

>>94259938
Time Locket

>>94263171
Exactly the same for anyone who can cast spells. Warlocks are no different, though I suppose it'll have the quirk that I'd assume it'd be the spell's base level rather than your Pact Magic slot. If you're 9th level and scribe Hex then it'd be the base 1 hour version rather than the 5th level 24 hour one (though that's more time and money efficient anyway, scribing a 5th level spell scroll takes 25 times as long and 60 times as much gold). Cantrips are an exception to being the base level, 5.5 cantrip scrolls treat the user as if they're the level of the person who scribed it for cantrip scaling

>>94258459
>and cancel it out with advantage, because you are blinded while obscured.
Wrong.

Any good tips for a first-time GM? Will run Dragons of Stormpeak Isle with The Drunken Treasure from Guide to Twisted Taverns as a starting point. The "campaign" will likely be a few sessions long, but gotta balance it for four PCs, one of them being a twilight cleric, so I am already considering how many tarrasques I need to throw at them.
I am stuck with anxiety as one of the PCs is trying D&D for the first time, and I want to leave a good impression. Youtube is not all that helpful, most tips on this campaign are "re-do everything lol"

>>94263520
On your first outing, so long as everyone's having a good time, it doesn't always matter if you're remembering everything properly. You can pick that stuff up over time, but people won't stick with the game if they don't enjoy it.

That's not to say that you should ignore the rules, but rather that you should weigh whether or not it's worth killing the game's energy to look them up if you don't remember in the moment.

>>94263560
>That's not to say that you should ignore the rules, but rather that you should weigh whether or not it's worth killing the game's energy to look them up if you don't remember in the moment.
I am a long-time player, don't think remembering rules would be problem, rather how to keep it interesting without having to railroad them, as three out of four players are veterans and they would commit shenanigans within the first 15 min, and I am not prepared for this.
How do you wing it? Do you have like, I don't know, a stash of extra NPCs and some side quests in case a guy from the party suddenly has a "brilliant" idea?

>>94261076
>>A. The wizard makes a simulacrum, and it wishes for a simulacrum ad infinitum. The whole verse is now filled with copies of the wizard.
This is level 17, you can do this and I'm pretty sure some official NPCs have done it but I could be wrong. I had one campaign that actually made it to the point where the PCs could actually do this and I didn't stop them from doing it- the outcome?
It was very powerful but my players had restraint and understood that abusing it to the fullest was not fun for the game. Two of the PCs both had Simulacrum running around, one of them had a series of Simulacrum staying in town, running his business, crafting magic items like potions for the team, and defending the town when they weren't around. Then when the other Sorcerer got access to it, by that time the group needed a series of Wish spells to teleport the entire planet's population off plane before the planet could have been destroyed so that's where these Simulacrum came into play. The Wishes saved many lives but it couldn't stop the main threat which the group still had to fight.
Hell, before this the Bard of the group utilized Create Magen + an ally with Aura of Life to make an infinte army of galvan magen. They had that army help protect a ransacked city. And the Player as well understood that bringing hundreds of creatures around wouldn't be fun, so he didn't do that! He brought a small number of them to help with certain adventures and bosses.
Another PC had True Polymorph and made an army of young Dragons, but also restricted themselves to not have so much to use in fights.

Basically- two big things helped here, the players showed restraint in not trying to overload themselves or thee campaign to not make it fun for everyone and second due to nature of my campaign having these extra bodies meant more protection for the cities, towns, and NPCs they cared about.

What is "natural language?" And how is the opposite of it better?

File: Screenshot_20241027_18364(...).jpg (413 KB, 966x654)

413 KB JPG

>>94262193

>>94263586
I honestly have no idea how to answer your question here because I've never actually run from a module. You just respond with the logical outcome of their actions.

>>94260039
Hmmmm.

Okay
So it summons

1. An adult white dragon
2. A Kalashtar Illusionist, with the ability to make one object or creature still tangible even when disbelieved a la mirage arcane.
3. A neutral good fur-smothered fiend with the stats of a chimeric cat, 1/day mirror image, 1/day cast a 5th level Shatter centered on itself, and a 1/day reaction to teleport up to 30ft and take one attack aimed at a now-adjacent ally.
4. A bone devil wielding a Returning handaxe and has at-will Call Lightning.
5. A paladin with a lance in each hand riding a dragonnel.

What else?

>>94263586
Railroading is a specific thing, which is negating the players' agency, choices, and intentions to reach a predetermined conclusion. An introductory adventure path generally has a bit less freedom than you'd have from a full campaign ideally, but there being a linear sequence doesn't inherently erase their ability to impact the narrative. Knowing what the scenario is and what matters to it and the participant NPCs well help you maintain some idea of where things can/should go within the adventure's framework. If the vets start trying to be shitheels for the sake of it just nod and say "right, seriously though, what does your character do." You can't railroad someone who isn't playing sincerely.
>How do you wing it?
Experience and knowing what matters. You don't need a stash of side quests if someone has a good idea, it's a starter adventure. If their idea is good, consider how it could affect the scenario like anything else and determine if there's a sequence of actions necessary to implement that and its potential consequences. Think of player moves as vectors of intent to a conclusion. Thinks will stand in the way of that vector, be it difficulty of task, obstacles, enemies, etc. Determine how those would appear and matter and you'll do fine. If there's no reason it could fail and success is trivial, then you have no need for a side quest or roll, it would just succeed and advance to a changed scenario where the players have what they attempted to do. What has changed? Keep the players abreast of the scenario and they'll want to keep changing it.

>>94260039
The Deck of Illusions is the best for this- but if you want to conjure monsters that can fight, I'd say make something like the Bag of Tricks that has a wider array of monsters.

>>94259938
The Coward's Fingerbones.

What are some things that can increase the difficulty of your spell save DC against enemies?

>>94263874
Ability score increases

>>94263874
Ability Score Increases and Magic Items (Rod of the Pact Keeper, Arcane Grimoire, All-Purpose Tool, Rhythm-Maker's Drum).

>>94263874
Bane, Eloquence Bard's Unsettling Words.

>>94260608
Would it nake sense to buy the book and just play it as the campaign?

How has peoples experience with divination magic been?

Ended last session with a player casting the Divination spell Divination (haha) and have come up with a cryptic rhyme to give them next session as an answer. Should be helpful without giving away too much, but we'll see.

>>94263932
Any more spells? I won't be getting many ability score increases and magic items can't be guaranteed.

>>94263651

Tag, traits and keywords are game terms that work as rules codifiers; gonna quote straight from a game with a strong ruleset (Pathfinder 2e)

>A trait is a keyword that conveys additional information about a rules element, such as a school of magic or rarity. Often, a trait indicates how other rules interact with an ability, creature, item, or another rules element that has that trait.

If you have a spell with the fire trait / keyword, will always have the SAME rules applied to them unless the abillity itself says so. It's a well designed shorthand to rules that can be easily refered to or even easier to be looked up, aka, you don't need to repeat the same text over and over, allowing it to codify and unify rules interactions in a easy way.

5e uses "natural language", which uses regular grammar and syntax instead of "game terms", allowing weird interpretations because there are no unifying rules.

>>94259938

The Emperor's Cloak

>>94263752
Thanks, that makes a lot of sense!

>>94264145
Silvery Barbs but its a re-roll not really reducing the save.

>>94263520
As a general rule for balancing for 4 PCs: low levels (1-3) tend to underestimate the danger of an encounter, while high levels (~7-20) will overestimate it. Also, remember that hard encounters don't matter as much as interesting ones. If you play smart and give the enemies clever tactics, they can punch above their weight and pose a fun challenge without feeling OP.

>>94261466
kinda cool no, I actually like it a lot but it really is just a deck of illusions with more varied summons, but a 1/day tag.

Up the charges to 7, and recharge 1+1d6 a day, while the the following ability only works once a day:


Rolling a 20 summons a heavy set scholar who begins playing duel monsters. Creatures within 15ft of the heavy set scholar who can see him must succeed on a DC 17 Wisdom saving throw or have the Charmed condition for 4+3d4 minutes while the heavy set scholar takes his turn. While Charmed, the creature has the Incapacitated condition and a Speed of 0.

If you get a feature that says "you learn so-and-so spell and can cast it for free once per long rest", what happens if you already have the spell learned as part of your prepared spells? Do you essentially just waste a prepared spell since you would have gotten it for free and could cast it for free? Can you still use the free cast?

>>94264716
You get a single cast of it that doesn't use any spell slots. It's also in your list of known spells as one that doesn't count against the preparation limit that you can cast with slots, just like if your subclass gives you free known spells. Darkness and Faerie Fire for Drow, for example.

So don't take it as a prepared spell if you get it as a feature. Note that this doesn't count for item-granted spells.

>>94264857
So for example if I was going for that meme Magic Initiate build mentioned before, would it be a good idea to delay getting something like Silvery Barbs or Shield until 4th or 5th level, rather than picking it as part of a caster's spell list?

In nu-5e, what's better overall when score improvement? A feat? Or the score increase?

>>94265035
Depends on your ability scores and your build. Many feats come with at least a +1 to an ability score as it is, but if you won't get many feat features then a +2 might be important for you.

>>94265035
it's class dependent. Paladins and Bards need to max out their cha as fast as possible, the rest prefer feats

>>94264933
Prepared casters (Wizards, Clerics, Rangers, Druids, Paladins) can just change what spells they have during a long rest anyways, and Sorcerers and Warlocks can replace a spell at each level-up.

>>94265035

Mostly class dependent.

>>94265035
War Caster is easily one of the best you can take for dedicated caster classes.

File: 1536846465106.jpg (61 KB, 728x704)

61 KB JPG

Can you take the same Eldrich Invocation option multiple times?

As in if I have Eldrich Adept, plus level 2 Warlock, could I choose Lessons of the First Ones four times on level up?

>>94265160

Yes, BUT only because it's a repeatable one... stated in its own description.

Read the fucking book

File: Opportunity Attack + War (...).png (117 KB, 1358x391)

117 KB PNG

>>94265137
This, new War Caster is really REALLY good. Opportunity Attacks on allies and its a half feat (CHA, WIS, INT) making it worth picking up on every single caster in the game.

>player gives me character concept
>it’s basically Finn from Adventure Time but he wields a gigantic sentient and evil sword that’s basically granting him all of his power as the boy’s dream was to be an adventurer, failed at every way to become one, and stumbled upon this ancient evil blade that promises him that it’ll make him the best adventurer ever
So… what do I do with this? Should I just tell him to not be a shithead and make a character reasonable for level 1 that isn’t starting with what’s basically a legendary magic weapon?

>>94265255
>player provides character concept
>it hinges on having a magic item
Immediately bin it.

>>94265255
Question- couldn't this concept work as a Warlock? 2024 Rules straight up give you Pact of the Blade at level 1 now so you could say his Pact Weapon is that evil sword and as an added bonus you can say his patron communicates through it guiding him to do evil.

File: dg47ztz-f21fb3d8-5383-449(...).jpg (1.59 MB, 2200x2800)

1.59 MB JPG

>>94265255
>>94265289
>>94265275
You don't even have to give him a magic weapon- just have it use the POB rules as normal.

>>94265193
I did, I'm just baffled that's actually clearly the intended design because of how insane it is. For one thing it basically obsoletes Pact of the Tome just by taking two of the Magic Initiate schools. I don't think there are even any level 1 rituals not on the Wizard, Druid, or Cleric spell lists.

Actually, reading Pact of the Tome, does the thing even allow you to cast the spells AS rituals, or does it just give you those spells always prepared and they happen to need to be rituals? Book of Ancient Secrets wasn't reprinted, so...

>>94265299
I don’t think POV weapons can be sentient.
But why not just forgo that rule

File: 2024 Pact of the Blade.png (136 KB, 789x566)

136 KB PNG

>>94265308
2024 Pact of the Blades can be sentient now, but even here we're not saying the Pact Weapon is sentient we're saying that the Patron is able to communicate through the weapon to the Warlock. Its like if they had Pact of the Tome or Chain and the patron can simply communicate through that creation/entity as a vessel or medium.

File: istockphoto-183380336-612x612.jpg (66 KB, 612x612)

66 KB JPG

>Setting has a guillotine (invented 1792)
>Setting doesn't have muskets (invented in the 1500s)