>I want to keep playing D&D, but nobody wants to be gm. The last game was months ago.
>One of the players wants to be a game master for a campaign, but using a different RPG.
Damn... oh well, I guess I'll take what I can get.

File: 5e schools of magic.png (771 KB, 497x943)

771 KB PNG

>>97967951
>Is necromancy like raising undead inherently an evil act?
Only evil casters use such spells frequently.
So most likely yes, because you're creating a monster that has an instinctive hatred of life and will seek to destroy life in any circumstance where it's not under your control.

Just use your spells to make money and then hire people if you want to be a non-evil person.

>>97967951
>tq
Way over-discussed topic, might as well ask the archives.

>>97967969
Cop out answer

File: Lich.jpg (4.05 MB, 8000x4302)

4.05 MB JPG

TQ: yes

>>97967979
nta but it's just a lazy tq

File: pablo-escobar-5.jpg (9 KB, 300x250)

9 KB JPG

How does Columbian drug lord Pablo Escobar relate to D&D 5e?

>>97968070
As a low-level mob boss. Dude can't even cast a cantrip.

>>97968103
He would have the equivalent of 80 billion today. Making him multiple times richer than Donald Trump and many other Billionaires.

>>97968167
So? Even with all that money he never bothered to buy even a single magic scroll.

>>97968180
He had an army of trained assassins

>>97968184
And? He couldn't even absorb elements a fireball or shield against magic missiles. At best he's a mini-boss for the actual threat. He has the stats of a commoner, no amount of gold can overcome that.

>>97968197
Maybe he is a mid-level villain in a quest where tracking him down is the goal and killing him is the payoff. It isn't a traditional quest but it could be interesting.

File: Screenshot 2026-04-30 at (...).png (1.97 MB, 1058x1470)

1.97 MB PNG

this was what I was thinkin about

>>97968239
Sure. But he himself is just some low-level human that has no inherent power himself. Like you said, all his power came from his money. Something anybody could theoretically achieve.

>>97967943
I specifically mentioned they were still used as part of bonus actions
>>97967891

But they should never be used as part of a monk's Attack action unless they're getting some kind of subclass bonus or they're shoving or grappling.
He should be using spear or quarterstaff, throwing daggers from afar, or using a shortbow or handcrossbow, barring feats for mastery property or muliclassing.
Unarmed is a little extra bonus action damage, or as a fallback option.

>>97968180
>>97968197
Dude definitely has a point. You literally cannot be a figure of note unless you can either cast Shield or are chonky enough to take a full salvo of magic missile and live.
Because magic missile just instantly, unavoidable and guaranteed, red mists any level 0 human if it can connect at all. And nobody that assassinatable can be real leadership for a serious length of time.

Either they die to the first apprentice mage that takes umbrage with an unpopular policy
Or they end up a puppet on threat of violence
Or they spend so much time paranoidly keeping everyone that could possibly cast a spell 120ft away at all times that they can't actually lead anything.

What if Pablo buy magic items? He doesn't follow player's attunement rule which mean he can be equipped with 100 legendary items or artifacts.

File: 1758515728093126.png (123 KB, 324x270)

123 KB PNG

>spent the last few days working on an alchemist class
>its a bit silly
I'm working on expanding alchemical items (weapons, explosives, drugs, oils, and basic utility items)

What do you think?

>>97968559
>concussive
should be thunder and/or bludgeoning damage to represent a shockwave. force damage is intrinsically magical and has zero real-world equivalence.

>>97967951
>Is raising undead inherently an evil act?
It is at the very least an inherently reckless act, because you are creating a fundamentally evil actively murderous creature.

Yes it's enslaved to your bidding as long as you keep renewing your control. But that's not as guaranteed as people like to imagine. If you are forced to cast too much and run out, if you die, if you get separated from your skeletons for too long... all of those unleash them on the world to go disembowel little Timmy for fun.
In our world, quite reasonably most weapons that can end up autonomously targeting something entirely different than its intended target are designated as war crimes. Currently all of those are biological agents, but I expect robots that behave thus will soon meet a similar injunction, that's some real Ted Faro shit. Made undead, especially if it's intelligent and contagiously self-replicating undead such as the Wights of Create Undead... it's hard to imagine them as anything but war crimes too, even ignoring the fact that it's desecration of a body which is its own separate war crime. Actually, it's a war crime thrice or maybe even quarce over really, because you can't resurrect a corpse made undead back into the original person since it becomes an undead corpse not a humanoid one, so it's effectively both unnecessary and deliberate kill-confirming of the resuscitatable defenselessly injured and also creating unnecessary suffering in the same manner as unstitchable bayonet shapes since it makes recovery much much more difficult and overall unlikely.

Which is why the book expressly states it's never a Good act, and is only used by Neutrals in extreme desperation.

Offenses 2, 3, and 4 do disappear if you're only using Animate Dead and only creating skeletons using non-human piles of bones, say the carcass of a leftover chicken, don't ask me how it grows it medium size and gains a shortbow and a scimitar, lol magic I guess. But never #1. It's always Ted Faro shit.

File: 1748567874497942.png (110 KB, 328x224)

110 KB PNG

>>97968563
Good idea. I'll swap it to bludgeoning. Aside from fire, I want elemental damage tied to alchemical weapons like bottled lightning, liquid ice, acid, and alchemist fire

File: 1girl, full body, aged up(...).png (1.11 MB, 896x1024)

1.11 MB PNG

>>97966453
The biggest perk to it is that it's a feature that's always available and can also be done for the party. It can be a free Pass without trace and that + this means +20 to stealth for potentially the whole party. I did re-edit it, and enabled the 1 minute, or by expending a spell slot to do it as a action or bonus action. (Meaning BA camo + action hide, and you're just gone), and then made it you can do anything but attack or deal damage breaks it. I did try to clarify it and did try to make it easier to use.
I haven't seen the LL ranger fully actually. And also that's not advantage on saving throws, it's free Flash of Genius (+Wisdom mod) to saving throws and stealth checks. I feel weird just adding making it solo ranger aura.

>Starting at 10th level, you can spend 1 minute creating camouflage for yourself. You must have either a disguise kit or access to fresh mud, dirt, plants, soot, and other naturally occurring materials with which to create your camouflage. When you are camouflaged this way, you gain +10 to your stealth checks as long as you do not move more than 15 feet on your turn. You may also expend a spell slot as an action or bonus action to magically create this camouflage.
>If you move more than 15 feet, take damage, make an attack or cast a spell that can deal damage, you lose your camouflage and you must use either your action or your bonus action before your next turn ends to fix, adjust and reactivate the camouflage. If you do not, it completely falls apart and it is lost.
>By using these same rules as above, you can also create camouflage to disguise other creatures, objects or traps with this same method granting them the same benefits.

>>97966714
That actually sounds really cool....

(And the link for anyone new to see)
https://docs.google.com/document/d/16xuFKFaDJX6on1uST1AQE-DoxELZ-fqarCoECVlD0FM/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.xjyfegokt57p

Just in terms of roleplaying potential, what would be a fun choice for a swashbuckler rogue? Starting at level 9, so panache shenanigans right out the gate.

>>97968624
>And also that's not advantage on saving throws,
I was referring to the change to Favored Foe under Tasha's ranger. Where at 9th it removes concentration and at 13th gives you advantage on saves against the target.

>The biggest perk to it is that it's a feature that's always available and can also be done for the party.
What happens when a level 1 Barbarian declares that they want to try and coat themselves in mud and stay still to get a bonus to their stealth check?
That's fundamentally my problem with Hide In Plain Sight as a feature. It's codifying something that would reasonably make sense for any character to try and do, and also gives a wildly inflated bonus towards doing so.
Arguably it makes even less sense if you can apply it to other party members, because that means that the Ranger can just cover a Fighter with leaves and suddenly any chainmail or plate is no longer clanking around.

Again, I'm not saying you haven't balanced it properly or that being able to give the entire party +10 to stealth checks for free isn't a strong benefit for the Ranger to have. I'm saying that this being a level 10 feature with the flavor it has is fundamentally flawed.
This is as if Rogues got the level 10 feature 'Pocket Sand' where they've finally learned to throw dust in the enemy's eyes. Except instead of just maybe just giving someone disadvantage on attacks for a round like you'd expect, it was just the Blindness spell.
It's making something that should be a mundane trick that anyone could use into an oddly powerful high level class feature. That's the bizarre part.

File: Ravenloft-the-horrors-wit(...).jpg (1.26 MB, 4000x2667)

1.26 MB JPG

Who?

>>97969445
imagine making art that good only to setttle on a dreamworks smirk and ruin the whole thing

>TQ
I would generally say that necromancy is almost always Evil, but I was thinking as to whether or not Aragorn's use of the Dead Men of Dunharrow was an example of necromancy in service of Good. Obviously that was a one-time use case that had more to do with worldbuilding than Aragorn's own abilities, but it made me consider a possible Good use of necromancy on a regular basis:

>roll Warlock (probably Celestial)
>Patron will from time to time find a soul that had been condemned to one of the Hells that is eligible for redemption, like someone who was mostly Good but made an Evil decision that condemned them
>Patron charges you with summoning these souls to the mortal plane to perform acts in the service of Good to prove their worth and secure that redemption

It's convoluted for sure, but I feel like it could be an interesting character to play.

>>97968624
>That actually sounds really cool....
It's in here, along with a bunch of other stuff:
https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/-VVNGbAUyyHU

>>97968704
People don't play them enough as spies. Pretending to be the carefree wanderer only loyal to oneself (as is the overused trope) but actually having skin in the game and having loyalty to the crown or some organization is cool.

>>97969889
Ancestral Guardians barb has ghosts helping you. That's not evil.

As >>97968575 explains, the problems are with Animate Dead and Create Undead and similar ilk. Because they create an inherently evil creature (that which animates the corpse is basically a baby nightwalker) and they ruin a corpse for ever being used to resuscitate the person, since it's not YOUR corpse anymore it's the undead creature made from it's. It's on par with dying to disintegrate, you need wish or true rezz.

Necromancy is not evil. Having aid from the dead and undead is not evil. Creating hostile-to-all-life undead by desecrating

>>97968575
>>97970320
I've always felt the "animated undead are innately evil and that just happens if they slip the leash" to be both unnecessary and a cop-out. Lean on the desecration of the dead as the reason it's seen as repugnant, even have the good-aligned gods oppose it because they think it's distasteful, but elemental evil being a product of a spell below 4th level has always seemed a bit too much. It honestly comes across like they were so determined that necromancers HAD to be evil--while still protesting that necromancy wasn't inherently evil--that they just hardcoded it in to avoid people exploring cultural differences or debating morality at the table.

>>97970320
In my example the animating spirit would be flavored as the soul of a penitent, but I agree with you otherwise. Even then, putting someone's soul into the body or skeleton of a different person isn't necessarily morally on the level

>>97970403
yeah all this pretty much, you are making an abomination of the laws of reality. not to mention how necromancy magic by definition is removing life force out of the living world in a way that can never be returned, and therefore the living word becomes more and more lifeless with each passing millennia

honestly I would even argue that revive is a evil spell, and many good gods that give clerics their power would bawk at the idea of ripping a soul away from their peaceful afterlife and shoving them back into a corpse

death is inexorable

>>97970855
>yeah all this pretty much
>proceeds to disagree with the entire thrust of the post he’s replying to
Interesting.

>>97970403
>that they just hardcoded it in to avoid people exploring cultural differences or debating morality at the table.
People already frequently don't even use alignment rules in 5e, because it matters so little and it's usually pretty obvious whether a character is being a dickhead or not.

>both unnecessary and a cop-out.
I'd argue that it's pretty important to giving the spell a trade off. Creating something like a golem is really expensive, while making an army of skeletons is cheap and easy. The downside is that they have the potential to go out of control if you don't constantly maintain them.
Having there be dark magic that is a shortcut to power and has some actual tangible consequences and reasons for why it is bad is a nice thing to have in a setting. What would be a cop-out would be if the spell actively just made people turn crazy and start kicking puppies simply by casting it.

Instead the instinctual hatred of life simply explains why liches and dickbag necromancers are the ones using it, rather than having any nations out there with a massive undead labor force that they don't have to worry about because there's no danger to them 'slipping the leash'.
But if you don't like that, it's very easy to make a setting where that isn't the case.

thoughts on this subclass? I think i should probably swap something with a smoke AoE that heavily obscures the area

File: Screenshot_20260430-135407.png (1.05 MB, 1080x881)

1.05 MB PNG

>>97971260
GOD DAMMIT

>>97971264
>permanent resistance to two damage types at 3rd level
Slow the fuck down there, buddy.

>>97970903
he's saying create undead should be morally evil rather than a mechanical punishment, i'm agreeing with him, what are you talking about

>>97971342
fair

>>97971395
His argument was that it should be something that is assessed as evil, rather than having palpable cosmological effects at 1st level. And you rolled up with
>you are making an abomination of the laws of reality. not to mention how necromancy magic by definition is removing life force out of the living world in a way that can never be returned, and therefore the living word becomes more and more lifeless with each passing millennia

>>97971412
god its like talking to a redditboy

>>97971422
No, no, you're more retarded than that. Especially with your "removing life force out of the living world" fanfiction.

>>97971264
>>97971399
Could probably just have it apply while raging. Or just stick with Fire damage. Most Fire-aligned creatures don't actually resist Cold

File: Screenshot_20260430-150824.png (1.14 MB, 1080x907)

1.14 MB PNG

>>97971342
>>97971529

patched

File: token_2 (2).png (115 KB, 256x256)

115 KB PNG

Posting looking for new players to add to our 5e table - tried reddit and got retards.

TLDR:
Homebrew grimdark setting (not cringe)
>Gods are dead
>World is run by eldritch entities & mageocracy handing out corrupting pact magic
>loosely FR

Table culture is roleplay first. We want complex characters with actual depth - flaws, drives, things to lose. Combat is there but we care more about your descriptors than your action economy. Not looking for min-max-monkeys (bad builds not required, just dont come just to roll dice)

Mostly European players so we run weekends starting roughly 3:30PM GMT~.

Foundry + Discord voice - DM on Disc if interested for more info

patrickc_

>>97972322
Patrick, you sound like kind of a douche.

>>97972347
thanks p

>>97970403
>I've always felt the "animated undead are innately evil and that just happens if they slip the leash" to be both unnecessary and a cop-out.
It's a primary source for a common low level enemy type. I don't know what to tell you, it's inherent to the basic blocks of the worldbuilding.

Cleric goes into dungeon, raises some corpses of dead adventurers. Dies anyways to enemy skeletons in the dungeon. Skeletons he raised become new enemy skeletons in the dungeon. Cleric becomes a dead adventurer, gets raised into a skeleton by the next cleric to pass through.

>>97970403
>elemental evil being a product of a spell below 4th level has always seemed a bit too much.
Not a product so much as summoned by, then given a physical vessel to inhabit. Much like how traditional golems contain earth elementals.

And for the record ALL normal undead are inherent evil that wishes to destroy all life. Certain intelligent undead, namely Vampires and Liches are an exception only because they are transformed directly from human and thus begin with a human mind (at least so long as they keep feeding, a starved (demi)lich or vampire mentally deteriorate into homicidal madness quite quickly), and even then though they aren't compelled to destroy do have a sustenance need to feed on the positive energy life force of the living. Also ghosts and revenants are people, but that's an entirely different situation when it comes to origin, there's no necromancy for negative energy channeling involved at all there.

>>97971519
>Especially with your "removing life force out of the living world" fanfiction.
It's adding negative energy plane, that means it's effectively removing positive energy plane, if not 1:1 then at least shifting the ratio balance.
Though it's no worse about it than a 3rd level Inflict Wounds, so it's kind of a goofy reason compared to the reasons I provided.

Brother in law asked if I wanted to join him and his friends, I've never played before. I'm unsure which class I should go for.

I want to have a full caster but can fight in melee, so I was thinking bladesinger or valour bard. Which can fight in combat better and which can cast better spells?

>>97972322
>>Gods are dead
>>World is run by eldritch entities & mageocracy handing out corrupting pact magic
Ah, Dark Sun
>loosely FR
Nevermind you ruined it.

Though a little less loosely and it's "we said stop fucking killing mystra you assholes, that's it god privileges revoked" could be a fun take.

>>97972527
Arguably Bladesinger in both cases.
That said, if you're entirely new to DnD, I might suggest going for a Warlock. They've got some reliable damage options while being a bit easier to grasp.

Otherwise, I'll also mention Moon Druid as a way to have plenty of spellcasting and be a solid bruiser when needed.

>>97972556
bad descriptor tbqh, mostly just vague race lore etc - unique setting/gods/entities.

>>97972322
>(not cringe)
Why would just lie directly to our faces like that?

>>97972322
Not interested due to you thinking roleplay and build optimization are mutually exclusive.

>>97972527
It's more about what kind of casting you want to do in combat.

Bard is primarily heal/support and mental effect crowd control.
Wizard is blasting, combat utility, and battlefield crowd control.

>>97972600
they're not - but some people come to the table with builds, not characters.

People who don't prioritise character at all are what we're trying to avoid.

>>97972322
>Table culture is roleplay first. We want complex characters with actual depth - flaws, drives, things to lose.

I'm more of a 35/65 when it comes to roles vs rolls. Good luck on your game, though. I got my group here, and we've been playing for over 6 years.

>>97972624
Thanks king! We've got a good core 4 players + DM - just want to make sure we keep the vibes

>>97968257
cant tell if its overcooked or undercooked, but it aint cooked right

File: 97972639.gif (1.87 MB, 240x228)

1.87 MB GIF

>>97972639
>king
>vibes

>>97972322
>Table culture is roleplay first. We want complex characters with actual depth - flaws, drives, things to lose. Combat is there but we care more about your descriptors than your action economy. Not looking for min-max-monkeys (bad builds not required, just dont come just to roll dice)
Have you considered playing an entirely different system, more conducive to character focus roleplay focus over combat focus roll play?

I hear Daggerheart is good and easy to learn.
Dungeon World has also been pretty popular, though isn't as popular in recent years because it's most vocal dev went full Magical Realm SA during a publicly broadcast live play and hard torpedoed his career, especially because he was basically Mr. X Card himself. "Die schärfsten Kritiker der Elche waren früher selber welche" I suppose.

>>97972497
>It's adding negative energy plane
It moves negative energy from the negative energy plane to the prime material. Healing spells move positive energy from the positive energy plane to the prime material. Pretending that counts as
>removing life force out of the living world in a way that can never be returned
is either retarded or disingenuous. It can trivially be reversed.

>>97972527
If you haven't played before play something without spells. Do everyone a favor. Maybe a big dumb fighter or barbarian. I remember in a game I played the DM's sister in law played druid despite having absolutely no idea how to play one. She spent 5 minutes on her turn every time but insisted on being druid. It was basically like this:

>I cast a spell!
>Alright, which one?
>...
>Which spell do you cast?
>Um...
>Where is that on my sheet?
>The section that says "spells".
>...
>This one here.
>Um...
>...
>...
>...
>I cast Earthbind!
>Okay, on who?
>...
>Um...
>I want to cast Earthbind on this guy.
>He doesn't fly, you know.
>What?
>That guy can't fly.
>...
>You know what Earthbind does, right?
>It traps them and keeps them from moving, right?
>It keeps them from flying.
>...
>They can still move, they can't fly.
>It doesn't stop them from moving?
>No.
>I don't want to do that, then.
>Um...
>...
>...
>...
>I want to cast Hypnotic Pattern.
>Okay, where?
>...
>Um...
>...
>I want to cast it on that guy.
>Centered on him?
>...
>I want to cast it on him.
>It's an AoE spell, you know.
>It is?
>Yes. 30 foot cube.
>Oh.
>In fact, you could probably get some of the other guys if you aim it between them.
>Um...
>...
>...
>...
>Okay, I do that.
>What's your save DC?
>...
>Your save DC?
>...
>Um...
>Should be written near your spells.
>Where are my spells?

Stale boring pasta aside, what is it with people wanting to be druids and doing nothing druidic with them?

>>97973617
I’ve found it helps if you actually define what a Druid is in the setting and what kind of role they fill in the world, rather than just leaving it as “obligatory nature guy”

File: Screenshot_20260430_21571(...).jpg (424 KB, 719x600)

424 KB JPG

How does this compare to swashbuckler when using 2024 rules?

>>97973677
This generally seems superior to Swashbuckler, though it doesn't really want to play like Swashbuckler.
Rather than Panache, being able to give all your allies advantage is much better than giving one enemy disadvantage. And likewise, being able to prevent all the enemies from making opportunity attacks by simply using your bonus action to Hide is much better.

That said, despite getting to use shields and spears/tridents, I don't think you'd want this for a melee Rogue. Using a shield and throwing darts is better.
Against a single big enemy, you'd want to grant advantage on the first turn, and then switch to debuffing by hiding.
Against multiple enemies, you want to use your bonus action to grant advantage as often as possible, so you don't want to be in melee where you might need to bonus action disengage.
And of course, ranged weapons make it a lot easier to tag a concentrating mage and make them fail a concentration check.
This subclass would probably be improved by getting finesse javelins. Especially with that 17th level feature, but that's so far off it's barely worth considering.

>>97972710
dude stop trying to mechanize fucking every aspect of the game. more rules is not better rules

>>97972710
Isn't that just PbtA junk?

>>97973833
anon, those are systems with FEWER rules, and more focused on narrative and roleplay than crunch.

Anyone have experience running games for a bunch of random redditors from /r/lfg?

My regular group hasnt been able to meet on a regular schedule and I'm fiending for some more D&D.

>>97973894
dungeon world is PbtA yes. But it sounds like he's the target audience for PbtA.

Daggerheart is the thing Mercer and co. shipped recently.

File: Screenshot 2026-04-30 at (...).png (3.52 MB, 1222x1578)

3.52 MB PNG

You would be shocked how little art there is of barbarians setting themselves on fire.

File: gtfo.gif (335 KB, 220x132)

335 KB GIF

>>97973903
>Reddit

>>97973952
id rather DM for shitlib enbie theater kidsthan fa/tg/uys tbqh with you lad

File: spit.gif (153 KB, 220x237)

153 KB GIF

>>97973997

>>97973916
Man, Unfired Arcana is a retarded name.

>>97973997
based

>>97974044
I know anon. I know

Does dual-wield axe barbarian work?

>>97974345
No, once you declare an attack with Nick/BA your character suffers a fatal heart attack.

>>97974346
I feel like I would be better off with versatile + shield, a polearm, or perhaps a greataxe instead

>>97974353
More attacks = more rage bonus
Shield = more AC
Polearm = reach
Non-reach heavy = biggest weapon damage
Different feats, mastery properties for different weapons
It's like there are benefits to each

>>97974353
That's probably true, but if you want to use two axes, there are ways to make it work.

I'd say it's overall better in 5.5e, where GWM got nerfed and there are more weapon properties that would make something like Dual Wielder with a Handaxe and Battleaxe more viable.
If you're doing 5e, it's hard to argue with heavy weapons unless you don't expect the campaign to go much beyond level 4. A heavy weapon/polearm is certainly more ideal there.

>>97973617
This guy >>97973640 is right. If you don't define a druid, then he's just the green wizard, and he'll just act like a green wizard.


>how does a green wizard act?
Like a regular wizard, except he turns into animals and heals people sometimes.

Roleplaying-wise, do druids have more freedom of action than clerics? By this I mean that a cleric's way of acting should surely coincide with the god they worship. But what about druids who obtain their power through their connection with nature?
nature don't seem to be conscious individual entities, more like a force.
>Revering nature above all, individual Druids gain their magic from nature.
And this:
>Druids are concerned with the delicate ecological balance that sustains plant and animal life and with the need for people to live in harmony with nature. Druids often guard sacred sites or watch over regions of unspoiled nature, but when a significant danger arises, Druids take a more active role as adventurers who combat the threat.
Protecting nature balance. But surely there's more to it than that,

>>97973617
>>97973640
>>97974391
would you gentlemen being willing to come up with an example of the issue you're mentioning? I literally don't understand why "green wizard" isn't more than enough of a delineation between the two classes. what is explicitly problematic "non-druidic" behavior from a druid player?

>>97974500
I don't know what they're referring to but I've seen players that have a character grow up in nature but don't even use Wild Shape and have given no thought to what spells they might prepare or why.
>it's my turn?
>okay, what can I do, maybe shillelagh and attack something?
Like, I have no idea why they're a druid instead of any other class, except that being a nature guy seems to be an appealing character concept (that you could realise with many classes)

>>97974511
it also doesn't really matter if someone is green wizardmaxxing their druid. mechanically, wild shape is versatile and especially strong for scouting, druid spellcasting can blast, control, and provide healing, all of which are circumstantially good and useful. those things provide ample identity imo. unless the druid is like, deliberately torturing squirrels, setting forests aflame, or doing other weird shit, I don't think they're behaving undruidly.

File: 1746202791770501.png (219 KB, 959x611)

219 KB PNG

>>97974500
It's not problematic unless it bothers (You).

Personally, I don't ever treat my character as a "class" because no one else in the world is a "class" Sure, you can call someone who fights a fighter, but those are general terms; that fighter might be a mercenary, or a knight, or a barbarian (nomad) But just because I picked rogue doesn't mean I know how to pick locks and live in a seedy alley with a pet rat.

But what the fuck is a druid? It depends on the setting

>IRL
pic related, I thought they were hermits and scholars or some shit
>dnd
people who want to preserve the balance between civilization and nature, usually leaning more towards nature. Rangers, on the other hand, protect civilization from nature. Usually monsters.
>warcraft
elves who abandoned arcane magic because demons are bad, so they want to live in harmony with nature
>diablo 2
elemeental magic users who are good at summoning
>Tolkien
Radagast the Brown, who is a wizard, but he was nature-focused, so he was a green wizard, and inspired the 1e druid

It's a goddamn circle, a DRUID CIRCLE

ah
ah
ah

>>97974511
This just reminds me of the stories about the 3rd edition playtests where the Druid player just hit things with a scimitar instead of casting spells.

>>97967995
>puckee aka pucke℮21 spamming his commission again
https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1csag1l/art_comm_vandervax_the_vengeful_lich_bbeg_by_alex/
https://desuarchive.org/_/search/image/R3ZGLpr6llIB-YZIuybu_A/
>33 times since May 2024

Why is GOO the only patron that lets you modify damage type? Seems miserly of the other patrons to not even give the option.

File: Jesus Christ.gif (88 KB, 640x634)

88 KB GIF

>>97974675
You'd think that perhaps the ELEMENTAL patron would let you change to their element. The DEI hires at WoTC doing the usual shit.

>>97974685
The devs over at WoTC kind of get hooked on one thing and that one thing ends up becoming the central focus of the entire subclass

>>97973903
i sometimes randomly browse the DnD reddit when it gets too slow here and i can tell you that i'd rather kill myself than play with any of them.

>>97974968
Why? What's wrong with them?

>>97975054
Literally just check the subreddit, man.

>>97975054
That's what we'd all like to know, probably they were molested

Is there any character concept you can think of that couldn't be very well executed with any of DnD's preexisting classes & subclasses?

>>97975054
Most threads are:
>New to DnD, what do I do?
>New DM, what do I do?
>How do I make a specific character from media?
>Cool art
>Thoughts on quirky character concept that has no motivation to adventure?
>DM problems that can be answered with, "talk to the players"

>>97973997
real
every other space on the internet is rapidly devolving into such plain retardation that redditors are winning by simply being too stupid to change

>>97975314
>Superheroes
>Pure elemental specialist. Elemental specialists exist, but they still have mixed elemental spells and simply gets benefits for their chosen element.
>Characters from media with specific powers
>Magic reflection

Any tips how to play barbarian as a highly factual driven high IQ academic irl?
Im afraid it will be boring and not suited for tactical combat

>>97975390
I dunno man, playing any class can be hard when you're retarded. I think you might be fucked.

>>97975450
Retardo

>>97975390
Approach your character's rages more like a trance state like those of Sufism, rather than just being really mad. By positioning it more as an abstracted level of consciousness, you'll retain more conceptual freedom to strategize and make tactical decisions instead of just being big dumb mad guy.

>>97975390
Path of the Wild Heart and Path of the World Tree seem like the subclasses that have the most tactical decisionmaking in combat. The former has you choose a bonus for your Rage based on what you think you'd need in battle, the latter gives you damage mitigation for your party and some crowd control. Other than that, actually play the character like >>97975569 says and try to contain your autism or at least direct it into playing the character.

>>97972527
>I want to have a full caster but can fight in melee
Hill Goliath War cleric farmer: Heavy armor, healing, prof. In weapons, d8, tough for extra hp. Prone atacks, grapling advantage and 35 f movement.
In comparison, bladesinger give you a lot of ac, but is still just d6.