Hey guys, I was talking to a friend who is going to build a 5e character for a dischord group that is interested in trying out this edition. The problem is the GM is anal retentive; he has blocked players from taking class options and races from SCAG, VOLO, and UEA, along with blocking Lucky and Pole arm mastery as feat options because he thinks those things are all broken/OP. Interestingly, he is OK with Princes of the apocalypse for some reasons.
As such I was hoping that we could help him workshop a an infuriating 5e character that is in the 2-3 level bracket.
Right now, I've suggested:
human variant fighter dual wileding handcrossbows (mostly viable because the GM hasn't likely read the Erratta)
moon druid that casts moonbeam and dodges all the time.
Anyone got any other suggestions for enraging this GM with low level options?
No need to dual weild with crossbow expertise. You shot with a crossbow (the hand CB you're holding) and so you can shoot again with the hand CB you're holding.
To be fair I would bid those class options too. It's just too much to deal with
The thing is, the GM is actually encouraging power builds by by restricting class/race/feat options.
My goal is to expose this issue, particularly since for the most part SCAG and Volo aren't any more powerful then what is already in players handbook 1.
That is true. I restrict PHB options that I don't like for a number of reasons but scag et all mainly because I dont want to deal with it.
The only real problem with scag is booming blade (GFB is ok) and it's not so much worse than sharpshooter/crossbow expert/pole arm expert (all of which i am Ok with in part but not in full)
Which is only one cantrip and ignores the host of other interesting options that become available to players like Battle rager (which is fun and fluffly but not particularly effective given the limitations on grappling), the monk builds, the rogue paths, blade singer or Purple Dragon.
Similarly, Volo's guide has some interesting options in there but for the most part they aren't catastrophicly imbalanced compared to whats in PHB1 (Half orc and Mountain Dwarf are both better options for strength fighter then anything in there)
At any rate, my buddy settled on going crossbow human fighter with expertise, archery, a plan to go BM at level 3 and then take spell initiate at level 4 so that he can get hex. In all, this should give him a thoroughly infuriating build that doesn't read as something right out of a reddit top 5 list.
webguy20I spend too much time on the InternetRegistered Userregular
Alright everyone, I need some help planning my Gamma World Campaign. I've spoilered the giant block of text below. Also, I know a couple of my players read these forums so if you just had a Curse of Strahd wrap of meeting in the last week or two don't read this spoiler! You know who you are. Tisyphany.
I've also cross posted this with the SE++ RPG thread, considering that and this thread are by far the most active on the forums.
I’m getting ready to run a game of Gamma World 7e (based off of DnD 4th ed). The basic plot is that this story takes place on a generation ship built out of an asteroid, it’s about 16 miles wide and 85 miles long internally. They were in route when the multiverse collapses and suffer serious damage, but are able to continue the mission, but internally everything is thrown into disarray, lots of damage, mutations, breakdown of command, etc.
The players awaken from cryo sleep (The crew does shifts awake and frozen, to jump through the decades) and find they have been mutated, and at that point we will do character creation.
During character creation they will be talking to a superior officer they had worked with on earth and have a positive history with. Also there will be the senior commander of the mission. They will tell the party that engineering has locked command out of the main ships systems, and the deceleration point is rapidly approaching, if they miss it the ship won’t be able to slow down in time to rendezvous with the planet they are headed to colonize. We’ll start the story off from there.
Now what the players don’t know is the bigger picture. During the trip the original probes have detected an intelligent lifeform on the planet their headed towards. A race of beings right at the cusp of the agrarian age. The probes hadn’t noticed them before due to their hunter gather nature, now a couple tribes have started farming and settling down the primitive beginnings of a village. Command and Engineering are both privy to this info, Command deciding to continue the mission, Humanity must survive in the cosmos, and there is plenty of room on the planet, no contact would be made for generations, and Engineering deciding that if the ship colonizes the planet that eventually humanity will either subjugate or wipe out these primitive beings. They base this on human history. They’ve decided that with the ship damaged, part of the colonizing population either dead or mutated from the collapse that this ship needs to miss its destination and give these alien people a chance to grow on their own, away from humanity.
My goal is to create a situation where neither side is black and white good and evil, but overall everyone are assholes. As the players work their way through this world they will learn both sides and the hope is they confront engineering at the end and there is a showdown where the players make the critical decision to decelerate or pass the planet by.
I need to be able to sell these people to my players, and I’m not sure how well to do this. This is where I need everyone’s help.
I figure Command are like the sales guys who can sell water to fish. They are very smart, and very persuasive, but also kind of greasy. They’ve persuaded probably 60%-70% of the ship that Engineering has become sellouts to the human race. That they speak lies and that the collapse deranged them. That they want to see humanity fail. Command is 100% about colonizing and preserving humanities presence in the cosmos.
Engineering I want to play like some of the socially inexperienced software programmers and engineers I’ve known. They are incredibly passionate about their stance, but they don’t have the ability to sway a large portion of the ship. They are fighting a defensive battle, one they just have to last through till they pass the deceleration point. Now engineering does have an Ace in the hole. A previous group of security had been awakened a few months ago and made it to Engineering, but they were swayed by the group and now work with them to prevent colonization. I figure the players can encounter this group throughout the campaign, first being completely out matched by them, but slowly gaining parity. The previous group doesn’t want to kill the players, they want to convert them to their side, but will take measures if they are absolutely pressed.
So after all that, help me write these characters. I’m not sure how to take these caricatures and turn them into real NPCs. I’ve listed a few folks I’ve thought of from each side. I haven’t fleshed them out at all yet though.
Command
1. Captain Bralin – Leader of Command
2. Commander Johnson – Previous superior officer in a mercenary organization the group was a part of.
3. Lt. Lee – Works on keeping the technology running that command uses, and researches how to get systems back online that were damaged by the collapse. Has some back door communications with people from Engineering.
Engineering
1. Head Engineer Jensen
2. 2nd Engineer Jollet
3. Hart – Leader of previous security group
4. Jorla – 2nd in command of security group
5. McMannis – gunnery specialist security group
6. Havarti – Recon specialist of security group
Maybe I missed something, but why are you purposely trying to infuriate your DM?
The dm has banned all books except PH(as well as certain classes and feats from PH) on the reason everything else is broken beyond saving so they are trying to figure out how to make a broken character using what is left to prove it is all relatively broken to some extent
Personally if I didn't like what he was doing I just wouldn't play. I'd give him a few sessions in good faith first; even with the restrictions it could be a lot of fun. But if you're making a character just to piss him off then I can't see how anyone is going to have a good time.
Personally if I didn't like what he was doing I just wouldn't play. I'd give him a few sessions in good faith first; even with the restrictions it could be a lot of fun. But if you're making a character just to piss him off then I can't see how anyone is going to have a good time.
I feel it should be very clear how to have a good time in a game like that, at least to somebody of your username.
It sounds like yes, they are. They're trying to "prove a point" that the most broken stuff isn't in all those extra books.
Apparently?
More specificly, I'm trying to show that the more you limit down the options of the players the more likely you are to wind up with players going for the more obviously powerful options.
And honestly, I'm not even *that guy* when it comes to F'ing around with Power builds. I mean sure, I can certainly do it and my characters tend to be well optimized between Race, class and background, but I'm more interested in playing interesting characters (such as my omni-sexual noblemen monk) then play-testing reddit's top ten most broken options.
And to clarify, it's one of two GM's that are setting out these restrictions and they're coming from a background of playing 4e where pretty much everything is OP (And I love it to death for it).
So Yeah: I'm hoping for the best with this and eagerly look forward to hearing back from my buddy on how his salt mining expedition went.
Any chance you can get the group sitting down at a table to agree nobody wants a broken powerbuild and that the dm should allow everything, and that if something ends up being too op the table agrees it can be addressed later but otherwise everything's fine?
I'm still wondering why you and your friend are actively trying to "mine salt" from this DM as opposed to rolling your eyes at the restrictions and just playing the game.
It's coming across to me as antagonistic. Like, "This DM is a jerk, so we're going to be DOUBLE jerks!"
+4
Options
AssuranIs swinging on the SpiralRegistered Userregular
I've only gone out of my way once to prove a point when playing a character. When we playtested Pathfinder, I built a druid that wiped out the rest of the party to prove a point about spellcasters in a 3.X setting.
I wasn't proud of it, but my friend insisted nothing was broken, so I pointed out the glaring weaknesses of the system that I had been carefully playing down for the last 5 years of the game as a player/DM. We never played Pathfinder again, so I guess it worked.
Currently, I'm DMing a barbarian who has GWM and is currently rolling +3 to hit with advantage at 1d12 +18 (20 str, +1 weapon) while raging at 4th level. He's also close to dead after almost every encounter because bad guys don't like seeing their friends get one shot. This is pretty much as "broken" as GWM gets (although it's not Sorlock level or Paladin/sorc) and honestly, it doesn't really feel that broken in comparison to older editions.
The other end of it with regards to us buidling this obnoxious archer to troll the GM, is that my friend ~who I helped to build the character for~ has the distinct impression that the GM in question is relying more on word of mouth then actual practical expierience for determing whether or not something is "OP/broken" and seems to want to ban/nerf things as a kneejerk reaction (her response to the goliath stones endurance was to suggest nerfing it because it was too powerful which just... no).
I
Currently, I'm DMing a barbarian who has GWM and is currently rolling +3 to hit with advantage at 1d12 +18 (20 str, +1 weapon) while raging at 4th level. He's also close to dead after almost every encounter because bad guys don't like seeing their friends get one shot. This is pretty much as "broken" as GWM gets (although it's not Sorlock level or Paladin/sorc) and honestly, it doesn't really feel that broken in comparison to older editions.
In 5e's defense, it's notionally balanced around point buy and point buy doesn't get you 20 str+a feat at level 4. Any character that gets to start a 20 in their primary and pick up a +1 weapon before level 5 is likely to overperform regardless of build.
Barb rage is also real dependent on the availability of long rests - 5e is also (again, in theory) balanced around the assumption of 6-8 encounters per long rest. At 3 rages a day, the barb ought to be raging for less than half the encounters; if he's raging in 3/4 of the encounters instead because the party's only averaging 4 encounters per long rest, that's also going to spike his performance pretty substantially.
+1
Options
AssuranIs swinging on the SpiralRegistered Userregular
OTOH, even without raging, he does 1d12 + 16. The real price he (and the bard healer) pays is in the lack of half damage taken back.
My buddy is going to be running a D&D game soon, which is awesome because I've been itching to RP for a while since my other group is still on hiatus.
I want to play a Battlemaster Fighter, because I've always wanted to try it out. At first I thought to do Great Weapon or Archer Fighter, since they're supposed to be really good, but I was thinking they might be too much. My buddy is a new DM, so while I want an effective character, I don't need a super optimized one.
I was actually thinking of doing a fighter that uses just a longsword, making use of the versatile property. Obviously it's not as much damage as a Greatsword, especially with GW Master, but I like the idea of a more nimble fighter. Instead of GWM, I could take the feat that gives extra BM maneuvers and an extra superiority die, which would give a lot of tactical options.
Are there any finesse weapons with the versatile property? Probably not, but it'd be fun to do a Dex based fighter with the same concept. I could do a Dex based fighter with a rapier, but I like the idea of using a single weapon in two hands (like a longsword or a katana, or something similar).
Yes and no. There are no RAW base weapons that are both finesse and versatile. However there is a magic item that is, the Sunblade is a +2 longsword with the finesse trait.
The thing I currently like best about 5e is that most options which are OP are OP on their face and do not need any additional rational for being removed from the game.
GWM is probably the weakest of the OP feats with the strongest going to Sharpshooter and CMB with a side of Polearm Mastery.
Sharpshooter because it's prime "but wait there's more" territory.
Oh, "you no longer suffer disadvantage at long range that is really strong", you say. But wait there is more; you also suffer no cover penalties effectively giving you +2 to +5 on every attack! "Wow that is amazing" you say. But wait there is more; you also have the option to efficient trade attack for damage! "Damn that is top notch!" You think to yourself. But wait there is more: you also get a puppy!
It's a trick. You have to raise the puppy to a full grown dog, loving and devoted.
And then, before you can use the Sharpshooter feat, you have to prove yourself a cold blooded killer by sharpshooting your dog.
My buddy is going to be running a D&D game soon, which is awesome because I've been itching to RP for a while since my other group is still on hiatus.
I want to play a Battlemaster Fighter, because I've always wanted to try it out. At first I thought to do Great Weapon or Archer Fighter, since they're supposed to be really good, but I was thinking they might be too much. My buddy is a new DM, so while I want an effective character, I don't need a super optimized one.
I was actually thinking of doing a fighter that uses just a longsword, making use of the versatile property. Obviously it's not as much damage as a Greatsword, especially with GW Master, but I like the idea of a more nimble fighter. Instead of GWM, I could take the feat that gives extra BM maneuvers and an extra superiority die, which would give a lot of tactical options.
Are there any finesse weapons with the versatile property? Probably not, but it'd be fun to do a Dex based fighter with the same concept. I could do a Dex based fighter with a rapier, but I like the idea of using a single weapon in two hands (like a longsword or a katana, or something similar).
Would that there was; I suppose you could talk to your GM about letting you reflavor a weapon to be versatile and finesse though if you can really sell him on the flavor of it.
And then one day at the livery stable you run into you ex-bosses spoiled brat of a son. He follows you home, kills the puppy and steals your horse Shelby.
Hey guys, I was talking to a friend who is going to build a 5e character for a dischord group that is interested in trying out this edition. The problem is the GM is anal retentive; he has blocked players from taking class options and races from SCAG, VOLO, and UEA, along with blocking Lucky and Pole arm mastery as feat options because he thinks those things are all broken/OP. Interestingly, he is OK with Princes of the apocalypse for some reasons.
As such I was hoping that we could help him workshop a an infuriating 5e character that is in the 2-3 level bracket.
Right now, I've suggested:
human variant fighter dual wileding handcrossbows (mostly viable because the GM hasn't likely read the Erratta)
moon druid that casts moonbeam and dodges all the time.
Anyone got any other suggestions for enraging this GM with low level options?
No need to dual weild with crossbow expertise. You shot with a crossbow (the hand CB you're holding) and so you can shoot again with the hand CB you're holding.
To be fair I would bid those class options too. It's just too much to deal with
The thing is, the GM is actually encouraging power builds by by restricting class/race/feat options.
My goal is to expose this issue, particularly since for the most part SCAG and Volo aren't any more powerful then what is already in players handbook 1.
That is true. I restrict PHB options that I don't like for a number of reasons but scag et all mainly because I dont want to deal with it.
The only real problem with scag is booming blade (GFB is ok) and it's not so much worse than sharpshooter/crossbow expert/pole arm expert (all of which i am Ok with in part but not in full)
Which is only one cantrip and ignores the host of other interesting options that become available to players like Battle rager (which is fun and fluffly but not particularly effective given the limitations on grappling), the monk builds, the rogue paths, blade singer or Purple Dragon.
Similarly, Volo's guide has some interesting options in there but for the most part they aren't catastrophicly imbalanced compared to whats in PHB1 (Half orc and Mountain Dwarf are both better options for strength fighter then anything in there)
At any rate, my buddy settled on going crossbow human fighter with expertise, archery, a plan to go BM at level 3 and then take spell initiate at level 4 so that he can get hex. In all, this should give him a thoroughly infuriating build that doesn't read as something right out of a reddit top 5 list.
Wouldn't Sharpshooter do more for him than Hex? With a hand crossbow he'd be getting three d6+13 attacks at level 5 (albeit with no to hit mod), with Precision Attack to pick up some accuracy slack.
Hex is probably better while its up but it's not better overall. If you want a hex abuse build you should go EK at three and then magic initiate at 4 (or warlock MC at 6) in order to get hex.
This will give you the slots necessary to cast hex reasonably often.
Edit: depends on the AC of the target of course and hex overlaps with the initial bonus action attack. (And is a bonus action to retarget).
Hex+2 attacks will be worse than 3 normal attacks normally and so def worse than sharpshooter initially. But once the hex is up the target AC will be have to pretty low for that to be powerful.
Hex is probably better while its up but it's not better overall. If you want a hex abuse build you should go EK at three and then magic initiate at 4 (or warlock MC at 6) in order to get hex.
This will give you the slots necessary to cast hex reasonably often.
I thought you could only use your class spell slots if the level 1 was in your regular list, otherwise it's 1/day (or long rest, I forget). I don't have the book in front of me, but I think Hex is Warlock only
EDIT - I just threw some numbers in Excel, and with hex it looks like the AC break even points are 16 on the first turn, and 12 on the second (I didn't check crits, though, which I think helps Sharpshooter). Below that number Sharpshooter does more damage, above it Hex does more. With Battlemaster dice Sharpshooter is better all the way to AC 20 (I don't think you'll see higher at low levels). Only for 4 misses per short rest, however.
Hex is probably better while its up but it's not better overall. If you want a hex abuse build you should go EK at three and then magic initiate at 4 (or warlock MC at 6) in order to get hex.
This will give you the slots necessary to cast hex reasonably often.
I thought you could only use your class spell slots if the level 1 was in your regular list, otherwise it's 1/day (or long rest, I forget). I don't have the book in front of me, but I think Hex is Warlock only
If you know a spell you can cast it with your slots. Slots are universal. If you do not learn the spell then you cannot cast it with your slots.
But magic initiate specifies that you learn the spell. It also specifies you may cast it for free at its lowest level 1/rest. The errata specifies that this limitation applies on level only to the casting granted by the feat (and therefor not castings granted by slots)
As a contra-example the eladrin race in the DMG lets you use misty step 1/short rest. But it does not grant you knowledge of the spell so if you have slots from other places you cannot cast it using those slots.
The full accounting of this is in he multiclassing rules where it's made explicit that while save DCs are separate based on each class's spell list the slots are shared in every way.
Edit: sage advice has apparently ruled the opposite; that you can only use spells from your same slots. But Jeremy Crawford is dumb and should not be listened to because he thinks that equipping heavy armor is something a rogue(theif) can do with fast hands as a bonus action but drinking a potion isn't
Edit: sage advice has apparently ruled the opposite; that you can only use spells from your same slots. But Jeremy Crawford is dumb and should not be listened to because he thinks that equipping heavy armor is something a rogue(theif) can do with fast hands as a bonus action but drinking a potion isn't
Well the real reason you should not listen to it in this instance is because there is nothing in the rules that even suggests that the level 1 spell you learn cannot be used by your spell slots while there is explicit wording that all spell slots are share between all lists.
This creates a situation where a rogue(AT)/wizard can cast hex (magic initiate) with his/her spell slots but a wizard cannot.
0
Options
AegisFear My DanceOvershot Toronto, Landed in OttawaRegistered Userregular
The issue in question doesn't seem to be about spell slot universality, but the Spellcasting feature. From the errata:
If you have spell slots, can you use them to cast the 1st-level spell you learn with the Magic Initiate feat?
Yes, but only if the class you pick for the feat is one of your classes. For example, if you pick sorcerer and you are a sorcerer, the Spellcasting feature for that class tells you that you can use your spell slots to cast the sorcerer spells you know, so you can use your spell slots to cast the 1st-level sorcerer spell you learn from Magic Initiate. Similarly, if you are a wizard and pick that class for the feat, you learn a 1st-level wizard spell, which you could add to your spellbook and subsequently prepare.
In short, you must follow your character’s normal spellcasting rules, which determine whether you can expend spell slots on the 1st-level spell you learn from Magic Initiate.
Each class with Spellcasting specifies that they only cast spells with those spell slots of those classes. The situation involving multiclass universal spell slots is that you have multiple spellcasting features, and your spell slots can be used for more than one spell list.
Also, how could an Arcane Trickster/Wizard cast Hex via its spell slots? Arcane Trickster uses the wizard spell list and its spellcasting feature specifies wizard spells (with additional school-specific restrictions).
Yes, that is the sage advice that is wrong. Notably because "In short, you must follow your character’s normal spellcasting rules, which determine whether you can expend spell slots on the 1st-level spell you learn from Magic Initiate."
No characters normal spellcasting rules prevent them from expending spell slots to cast spells from other classes. The ONLY restrictions that come in normal spellcasting is that
1) Spells known must be from a particular list
2) Some features only work with "class specific spells".
The multclassing rules make this explicit. All spell slots are universal and any spell may be cast from any slot. Warlock spells may be cast from slots granted by classes that have normal spellcating progression and normal spellcasting spells may be cast from slots granted by warlock levels. There is 100% no restriction on casting spells you know using slots anywhere.
Yes, that is the sage advice that is wrong. Notably because "In short, you must follow your character’s normal spellcasting rules, which determine whether you can expend spell slots on the 1st-level spell you learn from Magic Initiate."
No characters normal spellcasting rules prevent them from expending spell slots to cast spells from other classes. The ONLY restrictions that come in normal spellcasting is that
1) Spells known must be from a particular list
2) Some features only work with "class specific spells".
The multclassing rules make this explicit. All spell slots are universal and any spell may be cast from any slot. Warlock spells may be cast from slots granted by classes that have normal spellcating progression and normal spellcasting spells may be cast from slots granted by warlock levels. There is 100% no restriction on casting spells you know using slots anywhere.
The thing is, you're not actually multiclassed. Multiclassing is specifically defined as gaining a level in another class.
0
Options
AegisFear My DanceOvershot Toronto, Landed in OttawaRegistered Userregular
Yes, that is the sage advice that is wrong. Notably because "In short, you must follow your character’s normal spellcasting rules, which determine whether you can expend spell slots on the 1st-level spell you learn from Magic Initiate."
No characters normal spellcasting rules prevent them from expending spell slots to cast spells from other classes. The ONLY restrictions that come in normal spellcasting is that
1) Spells known must be from a particular list
2) Some features only work with "class specific spells".
The multclassing rules make this explicit. All spell slots are universal and any spell may be cast from any slot. Warlock spells may be cast from slots granted by classes that have normal spellcating progression and normal spellcasting spells may be cast from slots granted by warlock levels. There is 100% no restriction on casting spells you know using slots anywhere.
At no points do the multiclassing rules state that spell slots are universal, in a general sense. They state that when you are multiclassed and have multiple Spellcasting features, you no longer consult the individual class Spellcasting feature (which includes the section on spell slots), but rather the Multiclass Spellcasting feature which has its own table of spell slots and rules in general.
Your capacity for spellcasting depends partly on your combined levels in all your spellcasting classes and partly on your individual levels in those classes. Once you have the Spellcasting feature from more than one class, use the rules below. If you multiclass but have the Spellcasting feature from only one class, you follow the rules as described in that class.
There is no specific wording in each classes' Spellcasting feature to the effect of "these spell slots can only be used to cast spells from the <insert class here> list" because it's implied, by definition, that you aren't able to cast spells of another list, since if you could, you'd be a multiclass character and be supposed to be consulting the Multiclass Spellcasting Feature. And in the exception in question (Magic Initiate), that specifically has its own rule regarding spell slots because it is an exception to this situation that requires it.
I
Currently, I'm DMing a barbarian who has GWM and is currently rolling +3 to hit with advantage at 1d12 +18 (20 str, +1 weapon) while raging at 4th level. He's also close to dead after almost every encounter because bad guys don't like seeing their friends get one shot. This is pretty much as "broken" as GWM gets (although it's not Sorlock level or Paladin/sorc) and honestly, it doesn't really feel that broken in comparison to older editions.
In 5e's defense, it's notionally balanced around point buy and point buy doesn't get you 20 str+a feat at level 4. Any character that gets to start a 20 in their primary and pick up a +1 weapon before level 5 is likely to overperform regardless of build.
Barb rage is also real dependent on the availability of long rests - 5e is also (again, in theory) balanced around the assumption of 6-8 encounters per long rest. At 3 rages a day, the barb ought to be raging for less than half the encounters; if he's raging in 3/4 of the encounters instead because the party's only averaging 4 encounters per long rest, that's also going to spike his performance pretty substantially.
I also want to know what gm is giving out +3 stuff. My group has only seen a plain +2 or fancy +1 (meaning other effects) and not until lvl 10+. By 4 we generally don't even have nonmagical plate yet.
I gave out a +1 sword, on the first session to lvl 1 characters. Its not like the game gets fundamentally broken when the player has 5% more hit chance on level 1. And besides its cool. That said, my players aren't complete power-gamers but new to the game.
That said: how often do you guys tweak monsters away from the base stats? I don't think i've run monsters by the book since my party was level one. But i'm not running a homebrew.
0
Options
KayWhat we need...Is a little bit of PANIC.Registered Userregular
At level 5, my character has, uh. A necklace that prevents scrying. Oh, and a +1 whip, and a gemstone that allows him to speak a language he didn't have.
I gave out a +1 sword, on the first session to lvl 1 characters. Its not like the game gets fundamentally broken when the player has 5% more hit chance on level 1. And besides its cool. That said, my players aren't complete power-gamers but new to the game.
That said: how often do you guys tweak monsters away from the base stats? I don't think i've run monsters by the book since my party was level one. But i'm not running a homebrew.
What kinds of tweaks do you mean? Making beefier mans to kill or overhauls or ??
I gave out a +1 sword, on the first session to lvl 1 characters. Its not like the game gets fundamentally broken when the player has 5% more hit chance on level 1. And besides its cool. That said, my players aren't complete power-gamers but new to the game.
That said: how often do you guys tweak monsters away from the base stats? I don't think i've run monsters by the book since my party was level one. But i'm not running a homebrew.
Recently in the Undermountain pbp here, I halved the HP and size on a couple of giant spiders and called them the teenagers of the nest the PC's kicked over. All other stats remained the same.
Posts
Which is only one cantrip and ignores the host of other interesting options that become available to players like Battle rager (which is fun and fluffly but not particularly effective given the limitations on grappling), the monk builds, the rogue paths, blade singer or Purple Dragon.
Similarly, Volo's guide has some interesting options in there but for the most part they aren't catastrophicly imbalanced compared to whats in PHB1 (Half orc and Mountain Dwarf are both better options for strength fighter then anything in there)
At any rate, my buddy settled on going crossbow human fighter with expertise, archery, a plan to go BM at level 3 and then take spell initiate at level 4 so that he can get hex. In all, this should give him a thoroughly infuriating build that doesn't read as something right out of a reddit top 5 list.
Apparently?
I've also cross posted this with the SE++ RPG thread, considering that and this thread are by far the most active on the forums.
The players awaken from cryo sleep (The crew does shifts awake and frozen, to jump through the decades) and find they have been mutated, and at that point we will do character creation.
During character creation they will be talking to a superior officer they had worked with on earth and have a positive history with. Also there will be the senior commander of the mission. They will tell the party that engineering has locked command out of the main ships systems, and the deceleration point is rapidly approaching, if they miss it the ship won’t be able to slow down in time to rendezvous with the planet they are headed to colonize. We’ll start the story off from there.
Now what the players don’t know is the bigger picture. During the trip the original probes have detected an intelligent lifeform on the planet their headed towards. A race of beings right at the cusp of the agrarian age. The probes hadn’t noticed them before due to their hunter gather nature, now a couple tribes have started farming and settling down the primitive beginnings of a village. Command and Engineering are both privy to this info, Command deciding to continue the mission, Humanity must survive in the cosmos, and there is plenty of room on the planet, no contact would be made for generations, and Engineering deciding that if the ship colonizes the planet that eventually humanity will either subjugate or wipe out these primitive beings. They base this on human history. They’ve decided that with the ship damaged, part of the colonizing population either dead or mutated from the collapse that this ship needs to miss its destination and give these alien people a chance to grow on their own, away from humanity.
My goal is to create a situation where neither side is black and white good and evil, but overall everyone are assholes. As the players work their way through this world they will learn both sides and the hope is they confront engineering at the end and there is a showdown where the players make the critical decision to decelerate or pass the planet by.
I need to be able to sell these people to my players, and I’m not sure how well to do this. This is where I need everyone’s help.
I figure Command are like the sales guys who can sell water to fish. They are very smart, and very persuasive, but also kind of greasy. They’ve persuaded probably 60%-70% of the ship that Engineering has become sellouts to the human race. That they speak lies and that the collapse deranged them. That they want to see humanity fail. Command is 100% about colonizing and preserving humanities presence in the cosmos.
Engineering I want to play like some of the socially inexperienced software programmers and engineers I’ve known. They are incredibly passionate about their stance, but they don’t have the ability to sway a large portion of the ship. They are fighting a defensive battle, one they just have to last through till they pass the deceleration point. Now engineering does have an Ace in the hole. A previous group of security had been awakened a few months ago and made it to Engineering, but they were swayed by the group and now work with them to prevent colonization. I figure the players can encounter this group throughout the campaign, first being completely out matched by them, but slowly gaining parity. The previous group doesn’t want to kill the players, they want to convert them to their side, but will take measures if they are absolutely pressed.
So after all that, help me write these characters. I’m not sure how to take these caricatures and turn them into real NPCs. I’ve listed a few folks I’ve thought of from each side. I haven’t fleshed them out at all yet though.
Command
1. Captain Bralin – Leader of Command
2. Commander Johnson – Previous superior officer in a mercenary organization the group was a part of.
3. Lt. Lee – Works on keeping the technology running that command uses, and researches how to get systems back online that were damaged by the collapse. Has some back door communications with people from Engineering.
Engineering
1. Head Engineer Jensen
2. 2nd Engineer Jollet
3. Hart – Leader of previous security group
4. Jorla – 2nd in command of security group
5. McMannis – gunnery specialist security group
6. Havarti – Recon specialist of security group
Origin ID: Discgolfer27
Untappd ID: Discgolfer1981
The dm has banned all books except PH(as well as certain classes and feats from PH) on the reason everything else is broken beyond saving so they are trying to figure out how to make a broken character using what is left to prove it is all relatively broken to some extent
I feel it should be very clear how to have a good time in a game like that, at least to somebody of your username.
More specificly, I'm trying to show that the more you limit down the options of the players the more likely you are to wind up with players going for the more obviously powerful options.
And honestly, I'm not even *that guy* when it comes to F'ing around with Power builds. I mean sure, I can certainly do it and my characters tend to be well optimized between Race, class and background, but I'm more interested in playing interesting characters (such as my omni-sexual noblemen monk) then play-testing reddit's top ten most broken options.
And to clarify, it's one of two GM's that are setting out these restrictions and they're coming from a background of playing 4e where pretty much everything is OP (And I love it to death for it).
So Yeah: I'm hoping for the best with this and eagerly look forward to hearing back from my buddy on how his salt mining expedition went.
That's usually been the best option for me.
It's coming across to me as antagonistic. Like, "This DM is a jerk, so we're going to be DOUBLE jerks!"
I wasn't proud of it, but my friend insisted nothing was broken, so I pointed out the glaring weaknesses of the system that I had been carefully playing down for the last 5 years of the game as a player/DM. We never played Pathfinder again, so I guess it worked.
Currently, I'm DMing a barbarian who has GWM and is currently rolling +3 to hit with advantage at 1d12 +18 (20 str, +1 weapon) while raging at 4th level. He's also close to dead after almost every encounter because bad guys don't like seeing their friends get one shot. This is pretty much as "broken" as GWM gets (although it's not Sorlock level or Paladin/sorc) and honestly, it doesn't really feel that broken in comparison to older editions.
In 5e's defense, it's notionally balanced around point buy and point buy doesn't get you 20 str+a feat at level 4. Any character that gets to start a 20 in their primary and pick up a +1 weapon before level 5 is likely to overperform regardless of build.
Barb rage is also real dependent on the availability of long rests - 5e is also (again, in theory) balanced around the assumption of 6-8 encounters per long rest. At 3 rages a day, the barb ought to be raging for less than half the encounters; if he's raging in 3/4 of the encounters instead because the party's only averaging 4 encounters per long rest, that's also going to spike his performance pretty substantially.
I want to play a Battlemaster Fighter, because I've always wanted to try it out. At first I thought to do Great Weapon or Archer Fighter, since they're supposed to be really good, but I was thinking they might be too much. My buddy is a new DM, so while I want an effective character, I don't need a super optimized one.
I was actually thinking of doing a fighter that uses just a longsword, making use of the versatile property. Obviously it's not as much damage as a Greatsword, especially with GW Master, but I like the idea of a more nimble fighter. Instead of GWM, I could take the feat that gives extra BM maneuvers and an extra superiority die, which would give a lot of tactical options.
Are there any finesse weapons with the versatile property? Probably not, but it'd be fun to do a Dex based fighter with the same concept. I could do a Dex based fighter with a rapier, but I like the idea of using a single weapon in two hands (like a longsword or a katana, or something similar).
The thing I currently like best about 5e is that most options which are OP are OP on their face and do not need any additional rational for being removed from the game.
GWM is probably the weakest of the OP feats with the strongest going to Sharpshooter and CMB with a side of Polearm Mastery.
Sharpshooter because it's prime "but wait there's more" territory.
Oh, "you no longer suffer disadvantage at long range that is really strong", you say. But wait there is more; you also suffer no cover penalties effectively giving you +2 to +5 on every attack! "Wow that is amazing" you say. But wait there is more; you also have the option to efficient trade attack for damage! "Damn that is top notch!" You think to yourself. But wait there is more: you also get a puppy!
It's a trick. You have to raise the puppy to a full grown dog, loving and devoted.
And then, before you can use the Sharpshooter feat, you have to prove yourself a cold blooded killer by sharpshooting your dog.
Would that there was; I suppose you could talk to your GM about letting you reflavor a weapon to be versatile and finesse though if you can really sell him on the flavor of it.
And then one day at the livery stable you run into you ex-bosses spoiled brat of a son. He follows you home, kills the puppy and steals your horse Shelby.
Wouldn't Sharpshooter do more for him than Hex? With a hand crossbow he'd be getting three d6+13 attacks at level 5 (albeit with no to hit mod), with Precision Attack to pick up some accuracy slack.
This will give you the slots necessary to cast hex reasonably often.
Edit: depends on the AC of the target of course and hex overlaps with the initial bonus action attack. (And is a bonus action to retarget).
Hex+2 attacks will be worse than 3 normal attacks normally and so def worse than sharpshooter initially. But once the hex is up the target AC will be have to pretty low for that to be powerful.
I thought you could only use your class spell slots if the level 1 was in your regular list, otherwise it's 1/day (or long rest, I forget). I don't have the book in front of me, but I think Hex is Warlock only
EDIT - I just threw some numbers in Excel, and with hex it looks like the AC break even points are 16 on the first turn, and 12 on the second (I didn't check crits, though, which I think helps Sharpshooter). Below that number Sharpshooter does more damage, above it Hex does more. With Battlemaster dice Sharpshooter is better all the way to AC 20 (I don't think you'll see higher at low levels). Only for 4 misses per short rest, however.
If you know a spell you can cast it with your slots. Slots are universal. If you do not learn the spell then you cannot cast it with your slots.
But magic initiate specifies that you learn the spell. It also specifies you may cast it for free at its lowest level 1/rest. The errata specifies that this limitation applies on level only to the casting granted by the feat (and therefor not castings granted by slots)
As a contra-example the eladrin race in the DMG lets you use misty step 1/short rest. But it does not grant you knowledge of the spell so if you have slots from other places you cannot cast it using those slots.
The full accounting of this is in he multiclassing rules where it's made explicit that while save DCs are separate based on each class's spell list the slots are shared in every way.
Edit: sage advice has apparently ruled the opposite; that you can only use spells from your same slots. But Jeremy Crawford is dumb and should not be listened to because he thinks that equipping heavy armor is something a rogue(theif) can do with fast hands as a bonus action but drinking a potion isn't
Rekt.
This creates a situation where a rogue(AT)/wizard can cast hex (magic initiate) with his/her spell slots but a wizard cannot.
Each class with Spellcasting specifies that they only cast spells with those spell slots of those classes. The situation involving multiclass universal spell slots is that you have multiple spellcasting features, and your spell slots can be used for more than one spell list.
Also, how could an Arcane Trickster/Wizard cast Hex via its spell slots? Arcane Trickster uses the wizard spell list and its spellcasting feature specifies wizard spells (with additional school-specific restrictions).
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
No characters normal spellcasting rules prevent them from expending spell slots to cast spells from other classes. The ONLY restrictions that come in normal spellcasting is that
1) Spells known must be from a particular list
2) Some features only work with "class specific spells".
The multclassing rules make this explicit. All spell slots are universal and any spell may be cast from any slot. Warlock spells may be cast from slots granted by classes that have normal spellcating progression and normal spellcasting spells may be cast from slots granted by warlock levels. There is 100% no restriction on casting spells you know using slots anywhere.
The thing is, you're not actually multiclassed. Multiclassing is specifically defined as gaining a level in another class.
At no points do the multiclassing rules state that spell slots are universal, in a general sense. They state that when you are multiclassed and have multiple Spellcasting features, you no longer consult the individual class Spellcasting feature (which includes the section on spell slots), but rather the Multiclass Spellcasting feature which has its own table of spell slots and rules in general.
There is no specific wording in each classes' Spellcasting feature to the effect of "these spell slots can only be used to cast spells from the <insert class here> list" because it's implied, by definition, that you aren't able to cast spells of another list, since if you could, you'd be a multiclass character and be supposed to be consulting the Multiclass Spellcasting Feature. And in the exception in question (Magic Initiate), that specifically has its own rule regarding spell slots because it is an exception to this situation that requires it.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
I also want to know what gm is giving out +3 stuff. My group has only seen a plain +2 or fancy +1 (meaning other effects) and not until lvl 10+. By 4 we generally don't even have nonmagical plate yet.
That said: how often do you guys tweak monsters away from the base stats? I don't think i've run monsters by the book since my party was level one. But i'm not running a homebrew.
3DS FCode: 1993-7512-8991
What kinds of tweaks do you mean? Making beefier mans to kill or overhauls or ??
Recently in the Undermountain pbp here, I halved the HP and size on a couple of giant spiders and called them the teenagers of the nest the PC's kicked over. All other stats remained the same.