dnd-discussion

[novel ridge]

Btw I’ll not talk about alignment but actually get into the story of D&D itself, I’m willing if someone would do it

[humble cairn]

But why would I want to use Alignment when I think it's a terrible system.

[silk hare]

to some extent, but its not obvious imo, especially for new players

[green mirage]

In short it gets you to think about the wrong motivations for your actions

[covert root]

It's literally on the sheet, explained as you click.

I haven't brought in a single newb who's heard me say, "Fill the whole sheet," that didn't get that.

[silk hare]

I mean are you talking about d&d beyond specifically?

bc I know various layouts and not all have that

[feral fulcrum]

Call me in five hours when we're off this daily circular firing squad

[silk hare]

I personally dont use beyond for character sheets so that might be why

[normal drift]

And it’s something I’ve only ever seen new players use anyway…

[humble cairn]

I use it for all my characters. I also like that some books, like Journeys Through the Radiant Citadel, used it for their important NPCs. So much easier to roleplay those NPCs with PBIF (Personality, Bonds, Ideals, Flaws) to guide you than Alignment.

[hot gate]

Yeah for npcs I like it too.

Couldn't care less if pcs use it, unless it helps the players roleplay.

[normal drift]

Entirely fair. I started applying it with npcs a while ago, but all my experienced players just shrug and go idk when it comes to PBIF

[green mirage]

I think in 5e alignment is almost like a vestigial remnant of previous, more setting dependant versions of dnd

It made sense, but it doesn't apply as well in more modern setting agnostic renditions

[daring agate]

detect alignment has confusing worldbuilding implications

why would anyone let somebody who detects as Evil be a leader

[cyan narwhal]

I think the PBIF can be very useful for both players and DMs, players can have a guideline of their own making that helps them roleplay, while It also gives the DM something more to work with to add stuff to the plot that can be more personal to the character, mostly the bond and flaws part

[silk hare]

I mean depends on creatures etc. Good and bad are subjective

[daring agate]

also dagult neverember is canonically still Neutral despite being the driving malicious force in multiple books and 1 module

[humble cairn]

**Personality **- The default emotional “stance” of your character or their standing animation at the character select screen, if you will. This is how your character generally behaves when nothing else is going on.
**Bonds **- The people, places, and things that are important to your character, either good or bad. These are the connection points between your character and the game world, very important for integrating the character and the plot.
**Ideals **- These are your character’s ethics. This is where you state how your character believes people should behave.
**Flaws **- These are your character’s blind spots or things that plague your character in a way that drives the story forward and makes the plot more interesting, a built-in conflict generator. Usually they will be a kind of weakness in your mindset, but it can be anything else that consistently obstructs your character’s life.

[silk hare]

he is evil in the sense that they pursue a goal opposite to the party e.g.

example: party wants to save kingdom and protect people

person wants to abolish country bc they see evil in it and dont care about who they get rid of to accomplish said goal

[daring agate]

he stole like a million gold from neverwinter

[humble cairn]

Good thing that spell no longer works on humanoids.

[daring agate]

cool beans

[silk hare]

also e.g. a certain painter we would definitely classify as "evil", while the people at the time were fed propaganda about other dangers and not all may have seen him as "evil" if you know what I mean (even though he DEFINITELY was EVIL) but yk, just an example

[silk hare]

oh really? thats good then

[daring agate]

did wotc explicitly paint the vecna module as a setting reset akin to the 1e module die vecna die

or was it just implied

[snow zephyr]

That's why a 5.5 bvd/bed would be useful, it has nuanced descriptions of good and evil.

[humble cairn]

Hasn't for all of 5E: https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/2619090-detect-evil-and-good

[hot gate]

I don't think so. It seemed more along the lines of a "greatest hits" module, as you get to visit all the most popular settings.

[snow zephyr]

The domains of dread sort of just got rolled into one pocket next to the shadowfell

I'm saying they should actually do something with alignment to make it a better system rather than just discarding it

[marble lion]

I think the point is that morality is impossible to implement without causing fights

As a general rule i mean, not per table

[snow zephyr]

Morality is inherently a source of conflict, it's a matter of table how that conflict is handled.

[marble lion]

Yeah or you just dont

And let the tables do their thing

I think youll just fan the flames of this already conflict heavy aspect of any rpg if you implement mechanics around it

[snow zephyr]

Tables do their thing regardless of alignment anyway. It's been that way since AD&D, because the morality is subjective to a degree.

[humble cairn]

They had a better system already. One that did everything you need from Alignment and more, and better.

Was PBIF perfect? No, but it certainly functioned better than Alignment.

[marble lion]

When was that

[snow zephyr]

Iirc 2014 uses both to great effect

[marble lion]

Im fine with how 5e does it

[snow zephyr]

Even though I don't think I actually had many players use the pre-generated ones very often

[humble cairn]

Not imo, it didn't. It used PBIF just fine, and just kindof had Alignment there as well.

[humble cairn]

PBIF was better when you wrote your own, anyway.

[snow zephyr]

Alignment helped to contextualize the pbif choices

[humble cairn]

Not in my experience.

[humble cairn]

In the 2014 PHB.

[snow zephyr]

No experience is typical, I've seen it help new players understand the narrative implications for their choices. I've also seen both options be used to defend "it's what my character would do"

[humble cairn]

If you analyze the Alignment system that was actually written in the 2014 PHB without using any knowledge from previous editions, which new players wouldn't have anyway, it was a woefully under explained system.

I've seen Alignment cause more arguments and take away from game time and the game experience than actually be helpful.

[snow zephyr]

I've usually seen alignment as "this is the baseline of how you plan to run the character, and when you switch up it adds narrative depth to the situation"

[humble cairn]

The game runs better when people ignore Alignment, ime.

[snow zephyr]

Alignment is a description from the player about the character

[drifting zodiac]

I basically as new DnD enthusiast I think of alignment system as a guideline as how to play this character what kind of choices to make

[humble cairn]

Alignment is a top down grid system that tries to describe characters, but is so braod and general that if fails to do so very well in most character's cases.

[snow zephyr]

It's a guideline, not a rail

[marble lion]

As long as youre aware that you set that guideline yourself, thats fine

[drifting zodiac]

(I never played dnd 😭)

[humble cairn]

Personality is a character and player self created guideline that is personalized for each character.

[humble cairn]

It's not even supposed to be a guideline, not officially, it's descriptive.

And in both of those regards it's a failure anyway.

[marble lion]

Thats true but descriptions help guide your rp if you ever need to glance at the sheet reminding yourself of the role you want to play i think

[humble cairn]

Personality, Bonds, Ideals, Flaws .. these actually work as guidelines because they are self set and self adapted to the character.

[drifting zodiac]

I think the alignment system also is as a way to play heroes and villains without saying those words

[snow zephyr]

A description of the character as defined by the player that acts as a guideline for a course of action when the player is unsure how to proceed

[flint ledge]

I think alignments can help out, you shouldn't like hold onto it like a lifeline and begin arguing about whether your character would still be alignment X if they did action Y (given a few specific exceptions)

[humble cairn]

All of which PBIF does better, making Alignment entirely redundant.

[inner silo]

Can a beastmasters companion be an independent mount?

[drifting zodiac]

Can you play a paladin for example and then break your oath? In mid campaign

[flint ledge]

I mean breaking your oath usually has consequences

[humble cairn]

Technically a #dnd-rules question, but as a Beast Master player I use it as one, then just command it with my Ranger Features anyway. Ask your DM.

[inner silo]

Sure, just discuss what'll result from it with your dm

[inner silo]

Oki thanks!

[drifting zodiac]

But does the alignment changes?

[snow zephyr]

Firmly disagree, specifically because pbif is lacking context. You could 100% use the same set for both good and evil, so much so that it almost becomes a parody of itself without alignment to act as a guideline

[still plover]

What did you actually do?

[snow zephyr]

You're gonna have consequences and a new subclass

[humble cairn]

What do you mean lacking context? It has way more context than Alignment, which has no relation to the specific character, whereas PBIF is designed specifically with the individual character in mind.

[glass granite]

Yes. The specifics on what happens varies depending on the DM.

[flint ledge]

Uhm I mean alignment isn't something that instantly changes (except cursed objects maybe), maybe it would mark a slow shift in alignment

[still plover]

Just by itself PBIF describes four facets of a character whereas alignment is two.

[humble cairn]

All characters can change Alignment as easily as making choices in character. It's not a set thing, it just describes your choices and actions.

[humble cairn]

It could instantly change. It's not some immutable characteristic of your character, it's just a descriptive label of your choices and actions as per RAW.

[snow zephyr]

You could have the background fluff justify good or evil really easily. Alignment is a DM tool as much as a player tool. It's a tool of communication, and it works with the pbif system to provide the full context for both parties.

It's a way to telegraph what kind of interactions your DM should be prepared to run

[humble cairn]

So many people have come to the Character Discussion channel determined to have their character be Chaotic Neutral, not because CN is a significant part of their character personality, but because they don't want Alignment to be controlling their character. It's an effort to take the "None of the Above" choice. When you have a system that makes people want to take the "none of the above" choice, it's generally not a good system. Not even to mention that people misunderstand it anyway, there is already a "none of the above" choice in the 5E Alignment system, which is Neutral. Which takes the place of the old, and nonsensical, True Neutral.

[snow zephyr]

The CN focus is inherently a symptom of a misunderstanding of alignment. You yourself have said that it's supposed to be descriptive where they're treating it as prescriptive.

[humble cairn]

You could, but I've helped a lot of people over at character discussion who agonize over whether their character is Good or Evil. When I read their character description it's a perfectly fine personality that is interesting, but is neither clearly Good/Evil, Lawful/Chaotic and in fact sidesteps both of those spectra. It's such a waste of time that they feel they must assign an Alignment when they could just go with the Personality and Ideals they gave in their description and it would work just fine as roleplay guidelines.

[humble cairn]

Yes, this misunderstanding is endemic to the community regarding the system and gets in the way all the time.

Even the fact that they built a "none of the above" option into the Alignment system shows how weak a system it is.

[snow zephyr]

This is why things like the book of vile darkness and the book of exalted deeds were in older editions, to provide every last ounce of context for people that had questions.

It's also why I think they'd be a good edition to 5.5

[humble cairn]

Those were really rather problematic, though.

Trying to define and systematize or mechanize Good and Evil is just not great.

[flint ledge]

I mean the issue with that is that dnd itself is also alignment focused I mean a lot of the outer planes are alignment based and so are some weapons

[snow zephyr]

The book of vile darkness, yes. The book of exalted deeds doesn't have anything that springs to mind as problematic. Not to mention that an update could and probably would be handled much better.

[humble cairn]

Which they have been steadily moving away from. And good riddance.

[inner silo]

Is neutral in alignment just anything that isn't always lawful or never lawful?

[humble cairn]

This is the description in the book: "Neutral is the alignment of those who prefer to avoid moral questions and don’t take sides, doing what seems best at the time. Someone who’s bored by moral debate is probably Neutral."

Which is basically permission to not care about Alignment. IE None of the above.

[idle oar]

See https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dnd/br-2024/creating-a-character#Step4ChooseanAlignment for more info on alignments

[inner silo]

I see

[snow zephyr]

It's the middle ground, it's those not driven by greed or by the desire for fairness they won't necessarily bend to whatever is societally prudent but won't go out of their way to affront social norms

[inner silo]

So essentially most characters?

Idk, I haven't seen a single purely lawful or purely chaotic character so far

[humble cairn]

Yeah it's super broad, isn't it?

[snow zephyr]

Yes and no, a fair amount of players I've had tend to want to set wrongs to right and thus fall into neutral good

[jovial badger]

question:

[idle oar]

Again alignment should not be used as a prescriptive "this is how your character must act" but rather a roleplay suggestion.

[inner silo]

By neutral i meant all types of neutral on the moral line

NG, NN and NE

[humble cairn]

Yeah, you're going to go round and round in circles on this one.

[jovial badger]

i (first time dm) have made the mistake of allowing my loxodon to obtain the boots of springing and striding. what do i do? (he is 378lb and wants to jump on people)

[inner silo]

?

[snow zephyr]

It's a description of what you're planning to do with the character more or less, not what you have to do with the character.

[humble cairn]

Better to ignore Alignment entirely, you'll have a smoother character creation experience.

[glass granite]

Use the falling on people rules

[inner silo]

Give people spikes on their backs

[jovial badger]

2 types of people lol

[inner silo]

Alrighty. I already mostly do tbh

[glass granite]

Iirc, if the opponent fails on their Dex save they take half your fall damage and you take the other half

[jovial badger]

thanks!

[snow zephyr]

It gives the DM an idea of what kind of encounters play to your character while the background gives them the best way to fill in the fine details

[jovial badger]

so it would just be 1d6?

[inner silo]

I'm dming for my first group rn and i feel like if they all used alignment they'd all be NN/NG except maybe 1 CG person

[snow zephyr]

1d6 per 10 ft up to a max of 20d6 iirc

[humble cairn]

Character weight makes no difference to the falling on creatures rule.

[snow zephyr]

It's fall distance, not weight

[marble lion]

Should meet my soldier

[glass granite]

The player will also fall prone too if they go above 10ft

[inner silo]

I'm sure those exist, but i think there are more neutrals then lawfuls and chaotics combined

[marble lion]

Yes

[snow zephyr]

Neutral on the good/evil is less common than neutral on the lawful/chaotic

[marble lion]

Though thats in rows only, not columns

[inner silo]

There should be something in the middle between neutral and lawful and between neutral and chaotic to make it more specific maybe

[humble cairn]

The idea of someone "purely" Lawful or Chaotic is also kind of a trap. the most sensible way to run the Lawful alignment is "likes that rules and laws to govern behavior exist" and that's it. Not someone who rigidly obeys all laws everywhere, that's actually nonsensical.

[marble lion]

I think there are probably more evilgood than neutral

All laws everywhere no
All laws of his military yes

[inner silo]

On the good/evil most of people are good and on the lawful/chaotic most of people ard neutral probably

[snow zephyr]

Most people are generally good

[humble cairn]

You can be a Lawful character and still break laws, because every Lawful character recognizes some laws and not all laws that exist everywhere.

[snow zephyr]

Unless it's athis, because dark sun

[abstract zephyr]

I wish Cure Wounds or some other healing spell have the material component of 1 apple.

[inner silo]

Neutral is morally gray which i feel like a lot of "difficult to align" characters would be

[jovial badger]

oh PHEW

[abstract zephyr]

Just due to the M of spells being jokes.

[snow zephyr]

And a lawful paladin is likely to place their oath over whatever the specific rules of a nation or city are

[humble cairn]

Neutral on the Good/Evil spectrum usually just means that they don't go out of their way to hurt or help people.

[inner silo]

Btw chaotic just means you have your personal set of believes you move with?

[marble lion]

Anyone who is fully committed to the lawful part is not a normal person

Life is full of grey

[snow zephyr]

Hence why most characters err towards good aligned

[marble lion]

My character was not normal at all

[humble cairn]

Yes. Chaotic means that you think of your own reasons for doing things before you think of what society or other people think. That's it.

[abstract zephyr]

Yeah, Chaotic is you find your personal rules rank above laws.

[humble cairn]

Chaotic does not necessarily mean that you go out of your way to break rules and laws.

[marble lion]

Isnt that lawful

[snow zephyr]

But they're not an active impediment to your actions if the situation demands it

[marble lion]

If you follow strict codes and convictions, thats not chaotic

[inner silo]

So lawful adheres to a set of norms/rules accepted in a certain group and a chaotic comes up with their personal set of rules they adhere to?

[humble cairn]

No, everyone has their own set of personal codes unless they are insane. Making that the measure of lawfulness makes no sense.

[humble cairn]

You know what let me just pull up my explanation.

[marble lion]

But only a lawful person puts a high priority on them

[left notch]

hey sorry to cut in what is a good word for like a love that isnt allowed between 2 races

[feral fulcrum]

Forbodden

[snow zephyr]

The NE creed is greed. They are held to the code of gold first.

[humble cairn]

If you're determined to use Alignment, these are the best guidelines I know of, from years of hammering away at understanding it.
**Lawful **means..
.. you like that rules and laws that govern behavior exist. That's it.
Lawful does not necessarily mean (although you can make a character that behaves like this if you are going to an extreme) ..
.. you follow every law to the letter. This is nonsensical, people's morality does not change simply because they cross a border, nor do they have some omniscient ability to tell when they are breaking a law.
.. that you simply follow a personal code. Everyone has a personal code unless their sense of self is so unbalanced that they don't even know themselves, so this isn't a good metric.
**Chaotic **means..
.. that you think of your own reasons for doing things before you think of what society or other people think. That's it.
Chaotic does not necessarily mean (although you can make a character that behaves like this if you are going to an extreme) ..
.. that you go out of your way to break laws or flout societal mores. This is childish and simplistic.
.. that you are insane.
**Good **means..
.. that you care for the wellbeing of others and would rather not harm them if at all possible. That's it.
**Evil **means..
.. that you don't care very much for the wellbeing of others, you mainly only care for yourself.

[cyan narwhal]

Forbidden love

[left notch]

thank you so much

[humble cairn]

No, even a Chaotic person would value their own individual code.

[feral fulcrum]

Bit of a Cliche, if a classic one.

[snow zephyr]

Think rogues and barbarians vs paladins and clerics

[abstract zephyr]

Yeah, Chaotic is gonna say that their personal code of ethics is gonna outrank what laws are on the books.

[inner silo]

So societal rules vs personal rules?

[humble cairn]

A chaotic entity just would more likely have a personal code of something like "I do what I want, no one tells me what to do."

[marble lion]

I think rigit code, even your own, counts

[snow zephyr]

More or less

[humble cairn]

Yes, exactly.

[abstract zephyr]

I believe so.

[inner silo]

Alrighty

[marble lion]

Having no code being the code is an exception to my statement then

[humble cairn]

That leads to some very nonsense characters.

[inner silo]

Would be kind of funny if chaotic would just be breaking every rule though imo

[humble cairn]

But Alignment is nonsense anyway, so I can see why you might think that.

[humble cairn]

Yes, that is an example of a Chaotic character that is probably also insane.

[snow zephyr]

A lawful good person is more likely to stop and help someone stranded on the side of the road, where a chaotic evil person might help them so they can extract a price from them

[glass granite]

It’s the sorta thing that gets old fast imo

[abstract zephyr]

Alignment is more of a guild line for how your character could act, in my opinion.

It's hard to adhere to that, cause the trolly problem exist.

[marble lion]

A strict personal code is part of the lawful alignment

[humble cairn]

But it's a failure of such a system and there was a better one right alongside it in the 2014 PHB.

[snow zephyr]

You're gonna enjoy that character for about 15 minutes before it gets stale

[inner silo]

Very much, no-one would fit into it. But it'd be funny imo

[inner silo]

If they'd survive that long before getting arrested

[abstract zephyr]

Yeah, but again the PTFand other were also ment to be guidelines as well.

[snow zephyr]

It's a communication tool to tell the DM what kind of encounters work best for your character and the background traits tell them what details need to fit in that encounter

[glass granite]

I wonder what they’d do once they reach contradictory rules

[humble cairn]

Yeah, but PBIF actually works for individual characters because it's custom designed.

[abstract zephyr]

Right. A template or guideline.

[inner silo]

Explode

[snow zephyr]

Cry. They would cry.

[glass granite]

Sounds bout right to me

[abstract zephyr]

That is true.

[snow zephyr]

A guideline for the DM where the background traits are a guideline for the player

Which. See: server username

I see alignment primarily from the DM view because that's what I do most

[humble cairn]

PBIF has very useful stuff for a DM as well. Bonds are the things that the player uses to indicate where they want to be connected to the setting and the plot.

[snow zephyr]

That's what the background of a character is for

[marble lion]

Break the more popular relevant rule, and as a bonus point towards the other rule to start debates over their laws being bad

[humble cairn]

and Flaws are the buttons that the player is offering to the DM to press to make conflict and plot happen.

[snow zephyr]

Hence why it was listed in the background section of the phb

[marble lion]

I struggle really hard with the bonds section usually

[humble cairn]

**Bonds **- The people, places, and things that are important to your character, either good or bad. These are the connection points between your character and the game world, very important for integrating the character and the plot.

[snow zephyr]

Because the background traits only work in conjunction with the type of background.

[abstract zephyr]

The sad thing about Alignment is that it very easily outs who you as a DM may have acting as a problem/can make the party not work.

[marble lion]

Npc wise specifically

[humble cairn]

It's best when you work with your DM and the other players to make them, because they work as anchor points to connect your character to the other characters and to the plot.

[abstract zephyr]

Like, if you have a Chaotic Neutral and a bunch of Lawful Neutrals, there may/will be interparty conflict.

[humble cairn]

If all else fails, pick one of the other PCs and make them your Bond. then of course work with them to create the backstory reason for that connection.

[abstract zephyr]

Which I think the PBIF somewhat fixed.

[snow zephyr]

Characters should usually be built working with the DM for best results

[snow zephyr]

Not necessarily, that's where you get into the stupid alignments

[reef tundra]

Remember, alignment is descriptive not prescriptive. Characters of different alignments will not inherently oppose each other

[abstract zephyr]

Right. I was using the Chaotic Nuetral as an example cause I specifically have one player who decides to pull the "this is just how my character is" card all the time.

[reef tundra]

I have a party that consists of characters who are: neutral good, lawful evil, chaotic neutral, lawful good, and chaotic good

[marble lion]

Thats my favourite approach by far but havent gotten to do that in any game yet

[snow zephyr]

That's a failure of the player, not the system. You'd have them using background traits to do the same in the absence of alignment

[reef tundra]

And the characters work well together and have never opposed each other

[abstract zephyr]

Yeah, I know. I feel like some people see Chaotic and see it as a chance for anarchy rather than what it is.

[humble cairn]

It is much easier to spot when someone is writing a Personality that will be problematic than when it's just an Alignment.

[reef tundra]

Wait, add a lawful neutral too

[humble cairn]

And creating their Personality Traits is definitely something that I make a collaborative exercise so I have some oversight.

[snow zephyr]

Problem players are gonna problem player regardless of what justification they have to use

[cyan narwhal]

By alignment alone, they would clash constantly, if taken too strictly, so good for them that they know what alignment really Is about

[humble cairn]

Alignment is so much easier to use to hide those motivations, I have found.

[marble lion]

Most problem players have specific triggers

Not every problem player will always problem

[reef tundra]

You mean when it’s used prescriptively, not descriptively, which is not what it’s supposed to be used for

[cyan narwhal]

Yeah exactly that

[marble lion]

But yes completely removing a feature just because some ppl misuse it would be bad

[snow zephyr]

And that's when you have a private conversation with that player and work with them

[reef tundra]

Agreed. If that happened, then nothing would exist

[marble lion]

No i dont mean those triggers

I mean genuine problem behaviour

[humble cairn]

I have definitely gotten players to tone certain things down while writing their Personality Traits and prevented problems, because a lot of times a player isn't even trying to be a problem when they think they need to play out some stereotype of an Alignment.

[marble lion]

Most people are not all bad
Nor choose to be a problem

[still plover]

Okay. And?

[marble lion]

It was stated that problem players will be a problem, no matter what you do

[snow zephyr]

That's a conversation I have with players during character creation and something I explain to new players in depth

[marble lion]

I disagree
Each problem player has specific ways of causing problems and not all tables will have a problem with each player

[snow zephyr]

Most of the problems with alignment start and end with communication

[humble cairn]

Same, and I find it much easier to do using Personality Traits, and harder to do with Alignment.

[humble cairn]

I have found the system itself flawed and have discarded it.

[snow zephyr]

Agree to disagree on that point as no experience is typical

[humble cairn]

I have spent a lot of time explaining Alignment and the return is not worth that effort.

[marble lion]

I havent had issues with the alignments in play myself but i read about some from time to time

[reef tundra]

Actually, I’m beginning to agree with Ophidimancer here. One system does have more problems attached to it.

[snow zephyr]

And that is your perogituve, but I find it useful. That's why I think it should stay in the game, because it's easier to ignore a mechanic like player alignment than it is to homebrew it in

[marble lion]

Saying "dont make evil characters" works pretty well for me, then i usually answer the "what if its just selfish/for money" and i clarify "no", then we have a harmonic mostly game

[past blaze]

Multiple alignment systems working together can describe so much more than what is effectively only 9 options

[humble cairn]

No need for homebrew, for me. They already have Personality Traits. All I do is discard Alignment and I have had a much better game experience ever since.

[marble lion]

Definitely works

[snow zephyr]

That's why the system was background+alignment+background traits

[marble lion]

Backstory+pfib is much better than alignment

If i had to choose

[humble cairn]

It's so much work just to get people on the same page about The Nine Alignment System, and what do you get for it? Just a simple descriptor that doesn't even really help guide them to play their own character.

[snow zephyr]

I don't think alignment should be removed from the system altogether

[humble cairn]

Wholeheartedly agreed.

[past blaze]

That's less of an easy descriptor. What I do is essentially based off the homework of the stellaris ethics wheel. A Lawful Good Authoritarian and a Chaotic Evil Spiritualist can immediately evoke much more than just Lawful Good vs Chaotic Evil.

[humble cairn]

.. and then you get the detailed homebrew systems.

[marble lion]

But thats just lawful good with an authority personality or ideal or even flaw
Thats already a thing

[humble cairn]

Anyone used the MBTI in D&D?

[past blaze]

It doesn't even have to be detailed, you can literally just add one of six words and immediately that increases the variables

[humble cairn]

I ... don't really want to make a more complex grid. I'd rather skip straight to the heart and point of individualized roleplay with a write-your-own system like Personality Traits.

[still plover]

There's a thought. Are you sure traits like Authoritarian or Spiritualist aren't part of the existing PBIF, though?

[marble lion]

Me noticing one day that all my characters have authoritarian

[snow zephyr]

Iirc there are backgrounds with those options, they just phrase it differently

[past blaze]

No idea what MBTI or PBIF stand for

[humble cairn]

PBIF (Personality, Bonds, Ideals, Flaws)

[past blaze]

There's a massive difference between ~5+ lines of text, and

one word

[humble cairn]

MBTI is the Myers Briggs Type Indicator, a personality test that people use at universities and corporations, I was mostly joking about that.

[novel ridge]

I know MBTI it’s a personality test, I did and I got ENFP but I’m INFP now I believe bc I became introvert

[marble lion]

I write my pfib in bullet points

[humble cairn]

Yes, a line of text that you write for yourself can be truly customized for the character in question.

[marble lion]

Your idea isnt bad at all, its just that you could by same logic add another word
And another
And another
Which is what the pfib field is for

[past blaze]

The thing is

I wouldn't write an essay in a field I want to keep concise as a reminder and quick communicator
like a single tiny segment on a character sheet or statblock where it says alignment

[snow zephyr]

I've had players pick from the list of traits on a background and try to play into them, it usually ends up in the wholesale abandonment of the pfib because the pre-gen ones are very limited

[humble cairn]

I suggest people buy the Radiant Citadel book, because it's great, but on this topic I would point out the NPCs in that books that use Personality Traits PBIF (Personality, Bonds, Ideals, Flaws). Take a look at those and tellme you couldn't run that NPC right out of the gate better than if you were just given an Alignment.

[humble cairn]

Yes, much better to write your own.

[still plover]

Eh, the prewritten ones are suggestions. Do your own if you prefer, totally.

[snow zephyr]

I recommend buying the Book of Vile Darkness and Book of Exalted Deeds explicitly for their descriptions on the finer points of the alignment system

The rest is mostly take it or leave it. Though the juiblex priest is pretty cool

[cyan narwhal]

I ended up doing that with my first character, even without trying or thinking about It i basically used PBIF

[humble cairn]

Ehhh ... really going all the way back to Third Edition, though?

[humble cairn]

It makes sense, right? Just a few sentences to describe your character's mindset and personality.

[still plover]

Regarding NPCs, a common question I ask is what do they want, and what do they fear.

Get that in and even a single scene character has some kind of depth to their personality.

[snow zephyr]

The philosophy is better explained and you can find them print on demand

[silk hare]

oh we are still on PBIF?

[cyan narwhal]

Yeah in fact i really like how my character turned out, i essentially incorporated It in the background

[flint ledge]

Yeah

[novel ridge]

We mostly want to be lawful good, but they don’t always over triumph chaotic evil

[past blaze]

Saying "oh just use personality ideals bonds flaws" assumes that it's being discarded??? for some reason???
When no I'm talking about adding to the quick reference

When someone asks for a quick reference to my character's alignment, I feel like 9 options can be rather limiting, just saying neutral good could mean a lot.
But a Neutral Good Spiritualist is a more specific meaning, like if someone was to say Lawful Neutral Materialist.

Approximately 54 options is a lot sharper than 9.

[dim flicker]

good morning & good whatever timezone you guys are in

[cyan narwhal]

Heya and good morning to you molly

[humble cairn]

Have you taken a peek at the NPCs from Radiant Citadel?

[flint ledge]

Good morning!

[still plover]

No, but having a PBIF for a NPC sounds like a fine way to get a handle on them.

[dim flicker]

i started a new campaign lately with friends & was secretly relieved that nobody brought a pugilist class, cos idk how to deal with that just yet

[still plover]

Add more goblins.

[flint ledge]

Isn't the new puglist just better monk

[past blaze]

Isn't that basically a strength monk with exhaustion mechanics

[novel ridge]

Hi Agent Smith

[snow zephyr]

Height advantage for ranged foes

[dim flicker]

are goblins the duct tape of dnd?

[torpid hound]

If you're going to create a pacifist character, do it with a Cleric

[still plover]

It's Mr, not Agent, but hi. What's on your mind today?

[dim flicker]

wait youre onto smth...

[novel ridge]

Not much, I seen the character in ur pfp but I know Agent Smith is the villain of Matrix so yea

[snow zephyr]

Your monsters know what they're doing or they'd be dead by now

[past blaze]

IMO the term pacifist, in a world where zombies or malicious metaphysical entities can just be and violently attack you with the intent to kill, would more mean "Don't seek to kill as a first resort when possible"

[cyan narwhal]

Not really a pugilist but an idea i had for a character Is for a human (variant) raised by a tribe of orcs cause they were found when a child and already quite strong and became a luchador

[dim flicker]

all i know is: my friend said nobody has any reason to play monk now except for if u just wanna be fast

[humble cairn]

Hallmark of a badly designed homewbrew, imo.

[snow zephyr]

Or even just offering redemption instead of performing a coup de grace

[silk hare]

btw, just out of curiosity, what are some of your favourite monsters/ enemies that your dm threw at you/ that you used on your players?

especially low lvl ones that werent just the usual bandit or goblin

[still plover]

Well, I say goblins because everyone knows goblins are the baddies. Any kind of creature can do, especially if it's low-level. Want to up the threat in a fight? Add a goblin. Want to occupy a strong fighter so they don't nuke the boss? Add a goblin.

[dim flicker]

he said the class felt more like a fan submission

[dim flicker]

awh thats adorable actually :)

[still plover]

That's not my image.

[silk hare]

me when the boss has resistance against non magical attacks

[snow zephyr]

I whipped out some 2e AD&D manes

[humble cairn]

I had a very memorable encounter with a Death Knight when the party was only level 7. It was meant to be one we were supposed to run away from, but we threw everything we could at it, and somehow mid fight changed our goal to redemption, which I somehow accomplished with a sweet 37 on a persuasion roll (I had a lot of help with that roll, Guidance, Bardic Inspiration, Help Action, my own Expertise).

[snow zephyr]

Mr. Freeman, what do you know of Vecna?

[inner silo]

Can a beast masters pet be a lizard?

[humble cairn]

💯

[inner silo]

Great!

[cyan narwhal]

I ended up playing a dhampir rogue who who believes that money and power are everything to thrive since his noble family was slaughtered and he's now looking for ways to avenge his family and become the rischest and most influential man in the world

[inner silo]

I'm gonna have a lizard riding kobold then

[snow zephyr]

Depending on the level allowance it can even be a big lizard

[inner silo]

Beast masters beast increases in size?

[snow zephyr]

CR

[humble cairn]

Small PC with a mount is the GOAT! Mine is a gnome riding a velociraptor.

[past blaze]

Like unless you manage to go an entire campaign without dealing damage, then you're not typically a classic "pacifist" as per the most strict definitions, thinking violence is unjustifiable.

IMO, it's more apt to be more considerate of practical pacifism. Like saying "hey man I don't want to hurt you but this mcguffin is really important to my job" instead of going "they have the stick! Kill!"
A "Pacifist" would simply be, to put it bluntly, stupid to not try to do away with the shambling zombies trying to beat them to death, and I'd say fighting back wouldn't mean they can't be called a pacifist.
Would violence really be unjustifiable even against a literal moving wall trap designed to crush any victims in a room?
Just rolling over and letting yourself be beaten to death isn't a victory, it's the end of all you could do.

[snow zephyr]

Even though CR is another bucket of worms

[inner silo]

Hmm, is that from 2014?

[humble cairn]

Not if you're using the 2024 Beast Master.

[snow zephyr]

Challenge rating

[inner silo]

That's absolutely fire ngl

[inner silo]

This one is for 2024

[humble cairn]

Beast Master companions don't use CR anymore.

[silk hare]

the dm when you want to use a giant fly....

||and suddenly you need the jeweled saddle or whatever it was||

[humble cairn]

My bad, I meant to say ...

[inner silo]

Ah oki

[humble cairn]

Exotic saddle, yeah.

[flint ledge]

My dinosaur brain is blowing up

[snow zephyr]

I also think that not enough villains surrender when they're on the verge of death. It's a common trope to fight to the death, but that's unreasonable until higher levels

[inner silo]

Well a medium lizard is still big for a kobold

[humble cairn]

In-character I call her a Mountain Clawfoot, because "velociraptor" isn't a Faerun term. Her name is Mango!

[cyan narwhal]

Adorable name

[hot gate]

Be the change you want to see! Villains (especially bbeg lieutenants) giving up has lead to some cool rp moments in my games.

[halcyon forum]

Also giant fly is not a normal beast. It’s a statblock attached to a specific magic item

[humble cairn]

Mountain for the "Ute" in Utahraptor.

[inner silo]

If the villain is still a henchmen for an even higher villain, there's a chance that higher villain would do something even worse with them if they surrender to the heroes

[humble cairn]

Okay so technically she's a Utahraptor, not a velociraptor.

[past blaze]

I kinda plan for my current BBEG to start crawling and begging to be spared (villain is very slimy and has still done very horrible things) instead of just going from Fighting to Is Dead

[humble cairn]

Does your DM allow magic items from third party books? Because: https://www.dndbeyond.com/magic-items/9445585-voyage-collar

[inner silo]

I tried using it as a familiar once, the dm allowed it and i nearly died

Never trying that again

[silk hare]

currently not in a campaign but starting a new one as a dm, first time without people I actually know / have known for a long time

[cyan narwhal]

That's something i wish will happen when my character will face off those responsible of the massacre of his family, only for him to kill the bad guy regardless of the party sparing them

[silk hare]

so I actually gotta deliver now xD

[inner silo]

Btw if you could make a tiny pc that would make the beast master the best class for mounted combat probably

[silk hare]

tbh "best thing for mounted combat" is having access to summon steed

120 ft movement / turn + misty step 60 ft is pretty good

[burnt valley]

Exotic Saddle, you could honestly buy it at character creation

[silk hare]

well you COULD but probably some tradeoffs depending on class

[silk hare]

e.g. paladin or mark of passage

[humble cairn]

Primal Companion is a better combatant, but yes Find Steed is also good as a mount.

[burnt valley]

A free fast flying mount at Lvl 1 is like almost always worth it

[silk hare]

oh yeah, wasnt counting the steed as a damage dealer

[inner silo]

It's great but the best masters beast can also fight and follow your commands as an autonomic mount (forgot the exact name) and can fly if you want to

[silk hare]

just as means of movement here

[inner silo]

A tiny pc archer using the flying beast

[burnt valley]

How fast is said beast

The downside to this is having to play 2024 Ranger

[inner silo]

60 ft fly speed if it's a flying beast iirc. Also flyby

[humble cairn]

2024 Ranger is great!

I'm having a blast playing my 2024 Beast Master.

The action economy is so rich.

[burnt valley]

Also dont u get Exotic Saddle + Giant Fly even earlier?

[humble cairn]

When your Bonus Action turns into a whole other Action and Bonus Action you can do so much.

[inner silo]

It's small but a tiny pc could mount it, so those kinds of interactions is why i think we won't see a playable tiny species any time soon

[inner silo]

Doesn't that have low hp and ac?

[silk hare]

probably yeh

[burnt valley]

It doesn't matter if the majority of enemies are melee, you simply just keep moving back + cantrips

[inner silo]

The flying beast can pretty comfortably get around 25 hp and 16 ac at level 5 (iirc) with flyby

[humble cairn]

Just for attacking alone you have 2 attacks at level 3, 3 attacks at level 5, 4 attacks at level 7.

[inner silo]

The dm will target your flying mount 90% of the time

[burnt valley]

You get this at Lvl 1 and the movement speed + flying is what you probably want out of the mount anyway

[humble cairn]

And if you don't use all your attacks just to do damage, you can do other fun stuff. More than once I've had my Primal Companion save one attack to grapple me (which I voluntarily fail) and drag me away from melee to I don't get OAs.

[silk hare]

saving throw time against the stupid fly ngl

the enemy knows toll the dead, whoops

[silk hare]

honestly thats smart ahha

[inner silo]

It's ac is also 11 so it'll need to always use dodge to have any chance of survival

[humble cairn]

Yes, my DM tries to kill my pets all the time, which is why the Beast of the Sky works best for me, between attacking I use it's massive mobility to move it someplace where it would be very inconvenient to attack.

[humble cairn]

Which is why I think people complaining about Ranger haven't actually played one.

[inner silo]

Or you could do mounted combat and become a "tank"

[humble cairn]

Eh, no 'tanking' really. But Land Companion and Shillelagh are definitely my high damage stance.

[snow zephyr]

That's been my experience with the 2014 ranger too.

[burnt valley]

This honestly applies to both here, 16 ac is not that hard to hit

[silk hare]

tbh dnd doesnt really have "tanks"

[burnt valley]

That isn't a thing in 5e, it is in 4e tho

[humble cairn]

Though 2024 did make it more real with the Grapple changes.

[silk hare]

sure, some characters are "more tanky" than others, but still "tanking" per se doesnt properly eist

[snow zephyr]

Sure it does, that's what the wizard is for. They take damage to the face so the martials have time to do their stretches

[cyan narwhal]

I wonder how It would be to have a displacer beast as a mount

[inner silo]

True but if they still try to target your mount it won't be that effective and with the right build they'll be essentially wasting their turns trying to do that instead of attacking your allies

[humble cairn]

The Paladin's Find Steed has a version which can teleport with it's rider.

[past blaze]

You could argue some options could forcibly induce tanking via outright making it statistically a bad idea to attack non-"tank" targets, like getting disadvantage, or half damage... basically it was just ancestral guardians barbarian

[snow zephyr]

Attacking a mount is something that only veterans would think to do typically

[inner silo]

16 vs 11 with the beast being able to dodge as a bonus action in addition to dealing damage and it's hp scaling and it being able to become a land/sea beast if needed

[humble cairn]

My DM targets mounts. Which is why I only fly just high enought o be out of 5ft melee reach.

[burnt valley]

Its as real as a mirage

[humble cairn]

No, it's actually pretty substantial, with the ability to stack both hard and soft control on enemies in melee.

As well as deny them the ability to pass you by.

[snow zephyr]

I try hard to run monsters at the appropriate intelligence level. Only the far ends of the bell curve will target the mount. The rest target the rider

[flint ledge]

I mean honestly usually I target the more tank y characters/builds as a DM

[inner silo]

Rangers getting spike growth and plant growth is pretty great for control

[burnt valley]

You are arguing about damage here when the point of it is to move you back out of reach, it can only do m*lee attacks so it is more likely to get hit by anything else plus dies faster since melee deals much more damage than in ranged

[snow zephyr]

The smart ones or foes designated as soldiers/veterans target mounts and casters first

[burnt valley]

(idk why would you melee with a mount since this puts you even more in danger)

[inner silo]

It's much more tanky, has flyby so it can avoid opportunity attacks and if you must stay out of range at all times it can give you help as a bonus action and dodge as the main action

[humble cairn]

Free disengage is not bad.

[snow zephyr]

If you're good at grappling then persistent aoe spells get nasty real quick

[humble cairn]

Mounted combat's base benefit is increased mobility since you don't have to use Action Economy to Dash or Disengage.

[snow zephyr]

That and it looks cool

[inner silo]

Btw is the mounted combatant feat worth getting?

If your mount is medium

[reef tundra]

If you have a Mount, it’s always worth it. I would rather die than let my mount die

[humble cairn]

It's a maybe.

[burnt valley]

Its a moot point when you can achieve the same result by backing away anyway plus it uses up your action to use verbal commands on it

[snow zephyr]

Is 2014 considered an elder edition with the advent of 5.5?

[eager marsh]

No

[inner silo]

It's a bonus action to let the beast use both it's action and bonus action

[burnt valley]

Wdym

[humble cairn]

No, but any 2014 content that has been updated in 2024 is considered legacy. Any 2014 content that has not been updated is still considered the most current.

[eager marsh]

they're both 5th edition. It's just a rules update.

[snow zephyr]

Barding is worth it's weight in gold, sometimes literally

[inner silo]

What other feats would you consider instead?

[snow zephyr]

Thank you

[humble cairn]

The 2014 Core Books (PHB, DMG, MM) are legacy content.

[snow zephyr]

I'm not super familiar with 2024 rules

[humble cairn]

Depends on how you're building. What weapons are you using? If you do intend on spending most of your time mounted, Mounted Combatant is pretty good to keep our mount alive.

[swift wren]

Like 2014 but differnet. A lil sauce on top. Bit more options, enemies got a lot stronger and spongier in general.

[humble cairn]

Luckily they are available to read online for free: https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dnd/br-2024

[inner silo]

I planned to use shillelagh and shield

[snow zephyr]

Reach weapons are better for mounts

[humble cairn]

Nice! That's what I do!

Prioritizing Wisdom over Dexterity, I take it?

[inner silo]

Sadly no reach weapons use dex or wis

[inner silo]

Yep, since the beast scales on wis i think it'd work best

[humble cairn]

Consider also picking up the Magic Stone Cantrip for a ranged option that uses your Extra Attack.

[pliant sapphire]

Whip hehe

[inner silo]

Isn't it a d4 hitdice though?

[humble cairn]

Damage dice.

[glass granite]

But yes

[inner silo]

Right mb

[humble cairn]

Hit dice are things you use to heal.

[pliant sapphire]

Yes, but still a reach weapon

[inner silo]

Ig that's true

[humble cairn]

Not for a Wisdom meleeist.

Stick with Shillelagh, it's a great weapon.

And you don't have to worry about opportunity attacks if your mount can Disengage as a Bonus.

Consider stacking Longstrider and Jump on your Land Companion.

You want a lot of mobility for those charge attacks anyway.

Topple Mastery is nice

[inner silo]

Btw is protection fighting style maybe worth to take in this build?

[humble cairn]

Either Mounted Combatant or Protection, but both is probably overkill.

I would suggest the Defense FS.

[glass granite]

I would also consider dueling

[jovial badger]

the one that lets you jump in front of attacks 😭

[inner silo]

So +2 damage, +1 ac or freeing a feat

[humble cairn]

If you go Dueling, Polearm Master is a nice Feat.

Ohhh wait, no.

That uses a Bonus Action, doesn't it?

[inner silo]

Yep. Also no +1 wis

[humble cairn]

Never mind, your Bonus Action is almost always reserved for the Companion.

[flint ledge]

Reminds me my players want to play a centaur and a fairy to mount the centaur which honestly sounds fun

[elder sleet]

sup guys

[feral fulcrum]

I'm still annoyed that Centaur PC's are Medium, and thus unmountable by other Medium creatures.

[inner silo]

What about sentinel?

[glass granite]

It works, though I don’t think you’d need it

[inner silo]

Punishing enemies for trying to hit your mount and stopping them, though again no +1 wis

[humble cairn]

I think one of the first Feats I took was Observant.

[inner silo]

What does it do?

[glass granite]

Observant is an interesting pick.

[humble cairn]

Expertise in Perception, Investigation, or Insight. and +1 Wis.

[glass granite]

And you can search as a BA iirc

[feral fulcrum]

Mounted Combatant is probably a feat you want if you expect to be mounted often

[humble cairn]

Bonus Action Search.

[snow zephyr]

Small PCs?

[humble cairn]

Consequently I have a 27 Passive Perception.

[inner silo]

Sounds like a worse skill expert feat. Or maybe i just have a weird party that doesn't do search during combat

[feral fulcrum]

Small NPC's are fine, but you'll note I did say Medium Creatures can't ride other Medium Creatures, unless they have specific text in them saying otherwise. Which Centaur PC's do not.

[humble cairn]

Oh no I haven't used that feature of it, either, but having the extra Expertise is nice if you like using Skills.

[flint ledge]

I just let them be large if they want to, give them some extra hp but obviously they're gonna be a big target

[inner silo]

It's nice but not the thing i use most probably

[eager marsh]

passive perception is always used unless your dm dislikes you

[severe rampart]

or if the DM forgets about it

[inner silo]

We usually make perception checks

[feral fulcrum]

Size doesn't actually make you more of a target in 5E, outside of AOE's in cramped places.

[eager marsh]

expertise still applies then

[glass granite]

I personally like 2014 observant because I run it with expertise to get a frankly bonkers passive perception

[inner silo]

Can be grabbed from the base class

[humble cairn]

Passive Perception is supposed to be used all the time, but on the check front, I have a +17 to Perception.

[feral fulcrum]

The sole Penalty to being Large instead of Medium is you Occupy more space. And thus Squeezing Rules are likely to come into play.

[glass granite]

What level were you?

[eager marsh]

17+

[humble cairn]

Currently level 15.

[eager marsh]

thats only possible at proficiency bonus +6 with a 20 wisdom

[humble cairn]

Ioun Stone of Mastery!

[eager marsh]

smh...cheating with magic

[humble cairn]

It's a floating thingamabob for Blueberry, my Sky Companion, to chase!

[inner silo]

Tbh getting expertise in both stealth and perception would be great if 4 out of 5 of my allies didn't use heavy armour

[humble cairn]

The Ioun Stone of Mastery is also one of the few things that will increase my attack bonus and my spell save DC.

AND double benefit from my Expertise.

[glass granite]

Enhance ability, 2014 observant, level 20 monk and expertise can net you a passive perception of 39 (I think), which is just funny

[eager marsh]

It's a legendary magic item so congrats. I dont like the stones because they're super destroyable/snatchable

[humble cairn]

No flea can fart without you noticing.

[feral fulcrum]

Observant is basically all you really need.

[humble cairn]

In 2024 they made that impossible.

[eager marsh]

Neat. Still legendary so nice but not something to count on appearing

[humble cairn]

"Each Ioun Stone orbiting your head is considered to be an object you are wearing. The orbiting stone avoids contact with other creatures and objects, adjusting its orbit to avoid collisions and thwarting all attempts by other creatures to attack or snatch it."

[eager marsh]

i believed you already

[humble cairn]

I like to show my work cite my sources.

[eager marsh]

Taking points off for not being in proper bibliographic format.

[flint ledge]

I meant that and for enemies cause a lot of enemies would target the large charging centaur over the medium sized fighter for example

[rugged hawk]

Taking points off for being too pedantic.

[eager marsh]

Request denied. This is a D&D server that’s what we do

[marble lion]

Argue the specific pedantic finer points for hours
Then play and ignore all of them

[eager marsh]

Exactly!

[worn lagoon]

the people here like correcting others and getting stuck on minor wording details more than they like playing d&d

[tall forge]

I just like arguing (within reason)

[severe rampart]

One guy argued with me for 10 minutes because of "Two Weapon Fighting" (He thought I was saying Two Weapon Fighting, or Two Weapon Fighting)

Two-Weapon Fighting (Bonus Action)
Two Weapon Fighting (Feat)
Two Weapon Fighting (Fighting Style)

[humble cairn]

It's something pretty common to the geek community where demonstrating mastery of knowledge over geeky hobbies is how one gains community credit.

[severe rampart]

Even after I corrected him and set the record straight that I wasn't talking about the feat or fighting style he kept on trying to be like "erm, actually, it's not called Two Weapon Fighting, it's called the light property"

[worn lagoon]

getting angry over it is silly though

[humble cairn]

And when the hobby is something that relies on language, getting pedantic over wording is inevitable. Especially since sometimes minor wording issues actually matters.

[severe rampart]

It is, also why does John Wizard keep on naming all of these very different things the same name

[humble cairn]

Agreed.

[eager marsh]

D&D also attracts a lot of autistic people and we inherently care about minute details

[worn lagoon]

John Wizard did this on purpose to fuel even more pointless conversations where both people are wrong or right

But nah they probably just didn't think much about it

Or couldn't come up with better names for these seperate things

[severe rampart]

Lucky vs Lucky (Racial Trait and Feat)

[worn lagoon]

For something so dependent on how everything is worded, D&D sure has a lot of same name issues

[severe rampart]

Anyway, bout to get Content Sharing for my players, woohoo

[severe rampart]

Indeed it does

[flint ledge]

Speaking of content does anyone have any books they'd recommend for general stuff?

[fast latch]

Yeah that’s weird

[fast latch]

PHB and DMG

[swift wren]

Like in general-general or regarding playing dnd or game design @flint ledge ?

[flint ledge]

I meant additional books, I own those 2

[fast latch]

TCoE and EFotA come with an awesome new class

[flint ledge]

I mean like stuff that provides additional subclasses, creatures etc. I am aware of Xanathar's and mordekainen's and tasha's

[exotic sinew]

What one is EFotA?

[flint ledge]

Ebberon Forge of the Artificer

[exotic sinew]

Ahh

[flint ledge]

Not the biggest fan of the Artificer rework honestly so I'll just stay with the one from Tasha's

[exotic sinew]

Are you allowed to do that if you are playing 2024 rules?

[swift wren]

Tables are different regarding content, most are probably fine

[flint ledge]

Depends on the table but given I'm the DM at mine uh... Yeah...

[exotic sinew]

lol 😂

I wouldn’t mind giving dming a go once I am more familiar with the rules and stuff. But I would have to get a bunch of stuffffff

[snow zephyr]

Used to be called halfling luck

[snow zephyr]

Monster manual, phb

[severe rampart]

No, it was always called Lucky no? some people said halfling luck instead

[swift wren]

all you need is free tbh, you can get three dozen oneshots for free and can start right away

[snow zephyr]

I'm 90% sure that 2014 had it named halfling luck

[severe rampart]

"Halfling Lucky" is the official name of the racial trait, while "Halfling Luck" is a common colloquialism

[snow zephyr]

DM-ing is easy, doing it well can be challenging.

[exotic sinew]

Well I should say I would like to at least get one of those wet erase boards so I can draw maps at minimum for the players. But for like minis I can just use extra dice I have lol 😂

[flint ledge]

Also we're a VTT group so I have to get the licenses or make things manually before implementing anything

[snow zephyr]

You can do theater of the mind, that's what I did for the first few years I was running games

[severe rampart]

Woops, nope, I was wrong, I checked it out real quick, it's just straight up called "Luck"

[swift wren]

Print and Play, paper minis if needed

[severe rampart]

Foundry?

[flint ledge]

Yeah

[severe rampart]

you only need one license for that, no?

[flint ledge]

Yeah but for the dnd books too.

[snow zephyr]

Start where you are with what you have

Build from there

[severe rampart]

I use owlbear for VTT, DnD Beyond for books

[jovial badger]

is it illegal if my boss gains a few hit points here and there

[exotic sinew]

See I have a hard time with that as a player. Like I never know how far I am away from things or where things are properly. Idk the visual reference of a rough map is just easier for my pea sized brain

[snow zephyr]

Back in my day we had two pencils and a phb, and we had to share the phb

[still plover]

Little bit. Give them a legendary action: swig a healing potion. That's fairer.

[snow zephyr]

That's regeneration, it's native to trolls

[flint ledge]

Foundry has the books directly on their site cause of their wotc partnership so I don't have to buy the books and implement the stuff

[exotic sinew]

I also don’t know like how I would tell people I wanna try dming for a one shot. It won’t be for a while I want to get comfortable with the rules and stuff first before I do any of that. But like I just don’t know cause I know a lot of people like campaigns and stuff

[severe rampart]

Natural Regeneration aint half bad

[snow zephyr]

Map combat is way easier on both ends

[flint ledge]

It's helpful but also annoying cause not all books are available cause they don't port over from dnd beyond

[jovial badger]

like its a bugbear

[snow zephyr]

"I'm gonna run a one shot, I'm new to DMing so I might be a little slow with the rules"

[jovial badger]

and my party destroying it too easy

[severe rampart]

I hate bugbears

[snow zephyr]

One shots can turn into campaigns if they go well

[flint ledge]

Woah what'd bugbears ever do to you

[severe rampart]

Then make it swig a health potion, make it have an ability that targets the party's weaknesses

[snow zephyr]

Needs more minions

[jovial badger]

i love bugbears

[jovial badger]

ah health potion is a good idea ty!

[still plover]

You can list a one-shot, it's okay. Make it clear in the pitch, that's all.

[severe rampart]

Exactly what happened to my Curse of Strahd oneshot (now Curse of Strahd campaign)

[hardy scarab]

Off topic but does anyone know how to make a 5e Dr Doofensmirtz for my new campaign?

[snow zephyr]

The trick to starting is to start

[exotic sinew]

Alright….ill look into it down the line.

Again I wanna try and get comfortable with the rules of the game first and get a few basic things like the DMG and MM and stuff but I wouldn’t mind giving it a try cause it does seem like fun

[severe rampart]

well you don't have artificer in 2014... so, maybe a Variant Human Wild Magic Sorcerer

[snow zephyr]

The DMG is overrated

[hardy scarab]

Darn 😔
I can work with that tho

[snow zephyr]

You need to know the phb to make rules calls and the monster manual for monster selection

[severe rampart]

oh lord you're gonna play a Wild Magic Sorcerer in 2014 rules? may Bahamut help you

[flint ledge]

Isn't TCoE the 2014 Artificer

[snow zephyr]

The DMG is mostly for magic items

[hardy scarab]

I believe it's a homebrew mostly relying on 5e logic so it might be a bit different but thanks

[severe rampart]

Is it? I've never seen a 2014 Artificer

[flint ledge]

Yeah it's in there

[snow zephyr]

I know 2014 has an artificer, but it might be UA

The arcana, not the testing

[flint ledge]

Again it's in TCoE if they play with that

[exotic sinew]

Oh…. I will definitely be using a module for the one shot when i comes around to it cause i would like that bit of guidance ahaha

[snow zephyr]

Phandelver is great for that

Or cosmic city, or whichever book @humble cairn was talking about during the alignment discussion

[hardy scarab]

The neat thing about homebrews is that you can have Goku, Walter white, Spongebob, Dave from accounting, and Gabriel ULTRAKILL in the same party and nobody will question it

[knotty pasture]

(If your DM decides with anything goes)

[hardy scarab]

-# true

[tall forge]

Had a one shot with montgomery gator, gambit, bonnie, and chucky all in the same party

[hardy scarab]

Well at least shadow isn't there I guess

[tall forge]

I wish

Oh and gabriel ultrakill

They fought v2

[burnt valley]

So reworked and superior version of Sun Soul Monk, Alchemist if it was good, Bard(?, idk what Spongebob would be 😭), Commoner class that isn't Rogue and tome of battle Aasimar Fighter/Paladin

Imagine Sun Soul monks getting their own version of the Kaioken

[hardy scarab]

Imagine blue kaioken 😭😭

Better yet they'd probably have the requirements to get ultra instinct lmao

[hot marlin]

... I missed an alignment discussion?!

[burnt valley]

Ultra Instinct should be for the base class (the non transformation version)

[exotic sinew]

I’ll probably talk to the game store about it as well where I play cause they run AL games there so will see what the process is and stuff to like give back to the community for allowing me a place to find and learn how to play the game

[hardy scarab]

Unfortunately I think they wouldn't be able to use kaioken if ultra instinct was their base, or they're just able to be calm and have their body over clocked at the same time

[burnt valley]

Try to play it as rules as written first, most aspects of the game leave it up to the DMs

[burnt valley]

I think they can, MUI Goku was enraged by Jiren at the Tournament of Power and it didn't mess with the form

[exotic sinew]

Oh I will definitely be doing rules as written and having stats be point buy or rolling on the day.

I really like point buy though idk I have played rolling for stats and point buy and while I love rolling dice point buy seems to keep things a bit more “fair” and seems to allow for like dump stats and stuff better than rolling and the dice sleeping that day and you end up with no stat above 10 or every stat 18 at level 1

[burnt valley]

Yeah point buy is better overall, rolled stats can be hell on earth or egregious

[tall forge]

But also, rolling fun

[exotic sinew]

I think I’ll give it 6 months to a year so I can learn the game bit more than only having 5 one shots and 2 sessions of a campaign before I do try to dm my first game

[tall forge]

I allow rolled stats, and give everyone the same highest number and same lowest number

[flint ledge]

True rolling is fun

[exotic sinew]

I did say that I quote “while I love rolling dice point buy seems to keep things a bit more fair”

[flint ledge]

Though in my experience the characters with the best stats still roll the lowest

[rugged hawk]

Ugh, 27 point buy feels so absolutely awful most of the time to rolling

Especially since I'm used to 32 point buy from PF games

[tall forge]

My second favorite option is draft pool

Idk what its called specifically

But everyone rolls a specific number of dice (18 d6 total) and then get to use those to build stats

3 dice per stat

[exotic sinew]

Well that’s not raw though

[tall forge]

🤷

[exotic sinew]

That’s your own little custom rules

[tall forge]

I dont remember where it came from tbh

But its a good compromise of point buy and rolling for me

[exotic sinew]

Fair enough. I just think that for me personally if I do end up dming it will be with point buy. But that’s just a personal preference

[undone rain]

Damn i love battlemaster ngl

[tawdry sentinel]

I find rolling a bit pointless when it's the whole roll 4d6, keep the highest 3, reroll 1s etc.

Which to me, feels like "I want to pretend it's random but still have big numbers"

[exotic sinew]

I shouldn’t say if. More like when

[tall forge]

Tbf i dont think anyone wants a 3 in a stat lmao

[exotic sinew]

Technically if we talking raw you don’t reroll 1s

[tall forge]

i do want a 6, but 3 is a little too far

[flint ledge]

Reroll 1s I don't get

[exotic sinew]

Why would you “want” a 6

[tall forge]

But i dont like how close to 10 the whole 4d6 thing is

[tall forge]

Having low stats encourages other players to pick up what my character cant do, and lets me personalize my own character

I ofc want high stats too

[exotic sinew]

But -2 why not just 8 and have a -1

[tribal notch]

For me I tend to let my players chose if they roll i dont mind so as long as i can see them do it

[tall forge]

But i dont want all 18s, that would suck

[tawdry sentinel]

I quite like the draft pool idea. Where everyone rolls the 4d6 thing 6 times to generate your pool of stats and then take it in turns picking from them. But it takes a while.

[tall forge]

If i want to be bad at something, i want to be real bad at it

[tribal notch]

Fun fact one of my barbarians have a 1 in intelligence i did that to myself 🤣

[tall forge]

It helps i do online with friends, and can just go to them and go “hey roll xd6” randomly

[flint ledge]

Your barbarian is as smart as an animal

[tribal notch]

Ye I know thats the point 🤣🤣 hes all brawn and no brains

[exotic sinew]

I also think that personally with my first time dming due to me wanting to do a one shot having point buy isn’t going to be a horrible thing it’s.

[still plover]

Rolled is more fuss than it's worth.

But if the entire group are 100% on it, they can roll an array for the party that everyone will use.

[tribal notch]

I would recommend doing a one shot with a small group idealt low level if its your first time

[exotic sinew]

I was thinking tier 1 or 2 max and if tier 2 then level 5 only not the max end

[tall forge]

Point buys a classic, is the most balanced and easy to use

But i gotta get my dice rolls in….

[tribal notch]

Yea thays a good idea you dont want it getting to hectic

[tribal notch]

This is true i just like to risk it for the bit
Plus its funny when a one of my warlocks ends up with a minus in strength

[still plover]

One-shot, level 2, Five Room Dungeon method, opposition uses average damage.

[tall forge]

Agreed

I had a wizard with 6 con once. Very fun

[tribal notch]

Damn thats actually sounds really fun

[exotic sinew]

And I was thinking of picking one of those one shots that have follow up one shots as well that are all linked together so if I do enjoy it I can do a few of them

[flint ledge]

He lived very long I assume...

[tall forge]

Only died once!

[tribal notch]

I think my worst combo was a cleric with a minus 3 to Charisma

[tall forge]

Helps we didnt start level 1 lmao, that would have been hell

[tribal notch]

Because when he tryed to talk to people it just came out os grunts

[flint ledge]

4 starting HP 😭

[tribal notch]

To be fair thats not bad

[atomic kayak]

I use a Roll 3 sets Choose favorite method as DM (with SA as the backup that nobody has ever chosen), its a good time. Gives people variety. Very often I have people not choose the "best" (highest total) sets

[tall forge]

Absolutely, and it was only later in the campaign when i went into melee

(We got a really, really op sword…. In a party that doesnt use swords….. and i got tensers transformation)

[exotic sinew]

I will be using a module. Most likely one from the DMs guild that was written for AL cause at least that way I know they will be balanced

[tribal notch]

That is a good idea and also love the spell

[burnt valley]

Level 4-5 is a good middle ground

[exotic sinew]

Trips over a stick in a path….dies

[burnt valley]

Lvl 1 is too lethal by design

[tender fossil]

Second level is for closers

[crimson gulch]

I love starting at level one

[tall forge]

I dont like it much

A little too easy to tpk it looks like

[atomic kayak]

Level 1 (and 2) are explicitly tutorial levels

[tender fossil]

There's a reason why you need one 300 XP to hit level 2

[atomic kayak]

Its part of why the game expects/encourages you to skip them if playing with people who have played the game before

[tribal notch]

My go to is normally lv 3

[tall forge]

Plus its mildly annoying for rp purposes

[atomic kayak]

You are fully only meant to be at level 1 for a single session (and level 2 also for a single session)

[crimson gulch]

and i disagree with that, every time my parties get up to level 20 11 or 14 or wherever i end a game at, i need to bring them back down to one for the new start

because the jump from 1 to 3 and then 3 to 5 are such huge jumps that ground a player

[tender fossil]

I always want to play a first level character to start a campaign I don't like skipping. I want him to have a reason to have a thousand yard stare

[atomic kayak]

That sounds like a player thing then

[tall forge]

To each their own end of the day, but i like having my subclass and so do my players

[atomic kayak]

Just because some people need to redo the tutorial doesnt mean the tutorial is meant to be redone every single time

[crimson gulch]

i disagree that its a tutorial, i dont see that anywhere in the handbooks

[atomic kayak]

It literally is a tutorial by design

[tall forge]

My current campaign started level 5, its ran pretty well

[exotic sinew]

I wouldn’t mind level 5 cause everyone will have their subclass and if they have it they will get extra attack. The PHB in RAW also gives them some extra gold and some magic items.

[atomic kayak]

Its been stated as such in 2014, definitely out of the books and heavily implied in the books, and is explicitly in the books in 2024

[tall forge]

But i wanted my players to be reputable at the start in my world

[tender fossil]

It's a matter of taste. A lot of people enjoy playing the wet behind the ears rookie at least to start their campaign

[tribal notch]

In all honesty I think it depends on the dm

[reef tundra]

Level 1 and 2 literally strip the classes down to their most basic and core abilities, it’s a tutorial

[tall forge]

Starting level 1 means youre pretty much as a nobody, and that gets a little boring eventually

[exotic sinew]

I like level 1

[reef tundra]

Excellent pfp btw

[tender fossil]

Level one is an opportunity. You shaped your character You make them into what they're going to be.

[exotic sinew]

But that’s just me I am new so I like starting at nothing and adding little bits as I learn the class more

[tribal notch]

Tysm!!!! 😁 I found it on Pinterest and I was like hell yea

[jovial shadow]

I like starting off as level 1.

[reef tundra]

That’s perfectly valid! They are very well designed as a tutorial

[jovial shadow]

As long as you have a decent DM, it's fun

[tender fossil]

And sometimes it's fun if you have an indecent DM as well

[grim notch]

Levels 1 & 2 are a time where your character has an adventurer mindset, yet, I would argue they don't really become adventurers until thy acquire the subclass. Even then, they are like toddlers learning to walk.

[tall forge]

lvl 1 also has the subclass problem of “im a psionic rogue! Who… becomes psionic 2 sessions in”

[tribal notch]

Me personally I do enjoy being lv 1 when I get the chance to as its nice to go back to the basics as in the campieghns I run tend to get alot of homebrew stuff as well as the one im playing in

[tall forge]

Which for rp, can feel a little awkward

[crimson gulch]

i can only count 5 campaign books that start above level one (vecna, Spelljammer, Planescape, Netherdeep, mad mage)

and even mad mage is meant to be a level 1 start by doing dragon heist first. Level one is the default.

[atomic kayak]

(It was also one of the explicitly stated reasons that all subclasses were moved to level 3 - because it "didnt make sense for people to be making such important decisions when they were still learning the game/their character" (paraphrased)

[tender fossil]

It doesn't help that you get your subclass at level 3 in 5ther addition when some of the classes it makes far more sense to get it at level 1

[atomic kayak]

Not sure how that contradicts what is being said?

[reef tundra]

This convo came up last week, didn’t it

[still plover]

"Me ma said I was always a little bit psionic..."

[tender fossil]

And there is some precedent in older settings to have a higher level character at start. Dark Sun you jumped into it level 3. Birthright you were nobility right out the gate

[tall forge]

No, they said psychotic… /j

[atomic kayak]

Narratively, getting the subclasses at 3 makes the same level as sense.

Yes, including for sorcerer, warlock, and cleric.

All it really does is make it so that some things that used to exclusively occur in backstory now are more encouraged to be explored in actual story

[reef tundra]

Sacrificing a tiny bit of verisimilitude is worth making the game easier for newcomers to get into the game. That’s all I gotta say. Levels 1 and 2 are tutorial levels, good day

[exotic sinew]

For the person saying that level 1-2 isn’t a “tutorial” and is saying that it isn’t specified. Turn to page 43 of the 2024 player handbook

** “Your DM might start your group's characters at a level higher than 1. It is particularly recommended to start at level 3 if your group is composed of seasoned D&D players.” **

[tall forge]

Its not wrong to start level 1 either tbf

[atomic kayak]

The verisimilitude is still there to boot

Your draconic sorcerer still has a dragon ancestor or w/e at level one if that is who your character is

Just because they don't get any specific subclass abilities doesn't make it less true

[tall forge]

But its def built to be simple and easy for newcomers first and foremost

[exotic sinew]

Even Wizards of the coast are like hey if veteran players maybe start at level 3

[tall forge]

Which sorta means its a tutorial, yeah

[hot marlin]

Regardless, the decision on whether or not the first levels are a tutorial or not does not belong to the designers, it belongs to the actual campaign.

Certainly, the designers can mean it to be a tutorial, but at the end of the day it depends on you.

[tender fossil]

Or just start the campaign at the level appropriate for the adventure.

[atomic kayak]

Yea definitely not saying its wrong to do so, just that levels 1 and 2 are fully intended as tutorial levels to the system. And is why it also makes sense to skip it if playing with veterans

[tall forge]

It can always be considered a new game + challenge mode

[tribal notch]

I agree with this

[still plover]

Selling points for level one start:

• the party have no established reputation, they become who they are rather than starting that way
• they're way more likely to want to be given a job than find the plot themselves
• early days with single digit HP can make them fire-forged friends
• less overhead involved in changing a character when someone slept through Session Zero
• even a basic scenario can be exciting and encourage creative thinking to avoid a potentially deadly encounter

Downsides:

• fragile
• fewer options
• experienced players and particularly groups may want to Session Zero their early days and get in at the meat of the plot

[exotic sinew]

But also if you are running a module campaign that is 1-8 it seems kinda weird to me if you were to start it at level 3

[hot marlin]

Bear in mind, even the downsides can be selling points too.

[atomic kayak]

Well that i have to disagree with. The decision is definitely on the designers

What is on the campaign/table level is if you want to repeat the tutorial every time

[tall forge]

And the upsides can be downsides

[atomic kayak]

Im not sure why the term "tutorial" is being treated as a dirty word - its simply a descriptor of what it is

[tender fossil]

I'm more seasoned than salted pork, and quite a few grogs like starting off as nobodies and earning immortality

[hot marlin]

Who treated it as a dirty word? I missed it

[tall forge]

If we take it in the view of a “dnd is a game system first”, yeah lvl. 1/2 are tutorials, which exist at the start no matter what

[atomic kayak]

The general attitude from a bunch of people saying "it can't be a tutorial because X" is treating it as though being a tutorial is a bad thing

[crimson gulch]

mainly because i dont see that anywhere in the handbooks

[minor cargo]

#dnd-discussion message

“Your DM might start your group's characters at a level higher than 1. It is particularly recommended to start at level 3 if your group is composed of seasoned D&D players.”

[atomic kayak]

It is in the books though, as quoted before

And also explicitly stated outside of them

[exotic sinew]

I don’t think people are saying tutorial is a dirty word. But narratively speaking sometimes level 1 is a better starting spot so it wouldn’t be treated as a tutorial in those campaigns. But for a new player starting at level 1 is much easier to grasp how your character works than starting at level 5

[atomic kayak]

Among other times ^

[crimson gulch]

oh how bout that

[hot marlin]

Yeah, there's no doubt that some among the designing teams thought of the first levels as a tutorial time. Regardless, they don't really get to decide the structure of the actual campaign.

[atomic kayak]

They might not be saying it, but they are treating it as a dirty concept

[minor cargo]

I read back and it looks like we're not even really on the same page of what a "tutorial" is? That might be causing some friction here.

[tall forge]

I do agree with this- DND is tools for a game system, not the game itself

[atomic kayak]

As said before #dnd-discussion message

Just because a table is choosing to repeat the tutorial levels doesn't mean the levels are not the tutorial levels

[hot marlin]

The game is not the books, yeah. The game is the thing that happens around the table.

[tall forge]

Pardon me being a little pedantic here

But unlike tutorial levels, dnd early levels can be changed into the equivalent of a “challenge run”

If i run lvl 1 to be incredibly difficult, it no longer functions as a tutorial, but instead is a veteran challenge

[hot marlin]

And there is another question to be asked: Even if the designers intended level 1 and 2 to be tutorials, did they succeed at designing them that way?

[crimson gulch]

i feel like you just hit the nail on the head about my prespective on things

[tall forge]

Im pretty in the middle between you both lmao

[atomic kayak]

(And I am saying this as a fan of a game where the devs literally added more to the tutorial zone and making a whole thing about it because of players trying to max level in it - the original Guild Wars game)

The zone is still the tutorial zone, regardless of the time spent in it

[hot marlin]

But the designers of D&D did not design a zone, the DM did.

The DM is still the one who decides if this is a tutorial or not

[atomic kayak]

These things are not mutually exclusive though.

The levels are the tutorial levels, and can also be used for challenge stuff if you want

[crimson gulch]

the designers of dnd wrote a lot of areas, the starter kits are very much tutorial campaigns

[tribal notch]

This is what im thinking
Its down to the dm what is a tutorial and what isn't individually

[atomic kayak]

No... the designers most definitely designed what levels 1 and 2 are.

[crimson gulch]

but not every level 1 start is.

[atomic kayak]

They literally chose what you get at levels 1 and 2

[exotic sinew]

Yea idk maybe that’s just how your are interpreting it or maybe I am interpreting it wrong idk.

I just thought we all agreed that definitionally and the “intended purpose” from wizards was for level 1 and 2 to be a sort of “tutorial” or easier combats while you learn your character.

However if the campaign is more fitting to start at level 1 even with experienced players well then it’s not a tutorial it is just fitting for the campaign. Just like the same can be said for starting a campaign at level 5

[tall forge]

I think its better to say the designers built training wheels

And you can choose to use training wheels in a difficult way that negates the “training” aspect

[hot marlin]

Certainly, the designers intended those levels to be tutorials. Maybe they even succeeded at designing them to be tutorial, but that doesn't really matter. What level 1 and 2 are exists in a dialogue between the character sheet and what the world opposes to that character sheet.

[crimson gulch]

Keep on the borderlands, for sure tutorial.
Strahd, Tomb, Icewind Dale, Baulders Gate. Those are not tutorial level 1 starts those are Intense openings

[hot marlin]

And what the world opposes to that character sheet is dependant on the DM.

[south prawn]

I have to disagree that the levels themselves are intended to be tutorials. That doesn’t even make sense to me

[atomic kayak]

Levels 1 and 2 are tutorial levels by design and intent of the game. Full stop.

How you then utilize those levels is an entirely separate thing.

Yall are trying to say the former isnt true by saying its the same thing as the latter. They aren't, nor are they mutually exclusive

[tall forge]

I think its just a wording thing everyones getting mixed up on at this point lmao

[tribal notch]

Again agreement here you can always make the character and even if it is a tutorial level it could change to a intense session theres no issue woth it being a tutorial dont get me wrong but i personally belive the tutorial is only as long as the dm decides

[hot marlin]

Intent, yes. Design is arguable. A designer can intend something and then fail to follow on that intent.

The more I think of it, the more I reach the conclusion that the intent for it to be a tutorial was not properly followed through, making it a failure

[atomic kayak]

Tutorial levels =/= full tutorial

If it were a full tutorial you would only "ever" be able to do the exact same thing in every campaign at those levels. Which isnt the case.

[jovial shadow]

It's hard to believe there's this kind of discussion about starting at 1st level.

[atomic kayak]

Again, they are not mutually exclusive concepts but yall are treating them like they are

[tribal notch]

I agree how avout we change the subject

[hot marlin]

I am starting to think that all disagreement in that conversation comes from very different usages of the words "tutorial" and "design".

[tribal notch]

Whats everyone's favourite subclass ^

[tender fossil]

So what does everybody think about second level?

[noble tusk]

No more training wheels at second level in my games, level 1 I teach the players how to roll dice against some goblins, level 2, fight Vecna.

[tall forge]

So, maybe im wrong, but i may see an issue

Tutorial levels, as in player levels

Vs tutorial levels as in stages of a video game

[tribal notch]

Second level i think is a also good option as its in the middle of 1 and 3 both wich in my opion are important levels
But if I were to dm a lv 2 group id say start looking into subclasses

[sly crest]

I misread this as "teach the goblins to roll dice"

[atomic kayak]

Anyway level 7 is the best level to start at

[tall forge]

Ok

[worn lagoon]

I started my party at 8

[crimson gulch]

Eww no, its still 1

[noble tusk]

I mean my players wouldn't disagree with that assessment I fear. LMAO

[tall forge]

I wanna hear you out, give me the pitch

[worn lagoon]

having nearly no options to approach a problem besides fire bolt and said fire bolt instantly solving 90% of problems is boring

[tall forge]

I can understand lvl 1 or 3 or 5, but 7 feels off

[hot marlin]

Better yet: Start at level 20, but they lose a level regularly until they die. The campaign is about them coming to terms with their irrevocable decay and eventual death

[tender fossil]

I wanted to run Ravenloft back in the day everybody started at a higher level so we could play the adventure

[tribal notch]

For a long term campaign I tend to do anywhere between 3 and 5 but if I do a mini campaign or a one shot its normal 10 plus

[tall forge]

Bro im early 20s, i dont need that yet

[sly crest]

I would honestly play a campaign of Goblins and Kobolds otherthrowing the bigger, meaner monsters that push them around

[minor cargo]

1 is 1. 2 is basically 1. 3 is definitely 3. 4 is 3. 5 is 5, I think. I think 6 is also 5. 7, 8, 9, and 10 are 10, I think. 11 I think is also 10. 12 is 12, 13 is 14, and I think 15 is definitely 15. 16, 17, and 18 are all 18. 19 is also 18. And 20 is obviously 20.

(I wrote this purposely vague and confusing. As a joke.)

[tribal notch]

Ooooooo I like this

[hot marlin]

Best time to start considering your mortality

[tall forge]

I already had cancer i did that already…

[halcyon forum]

I agree

[tall forge]

It was a speedrun tech

[knotty vine]

I just woke up and is this about

[tall forge]

Skips the midlife crisis

[sly crest]

oof. Are you doing better now?

[worn lagoon]

i agreed to this lv1 start table out of desperation but i'm not particularly looking forward to the game part of the role playing game because it's gonna be fire bolt and win

[tall forge]

Got cured 😎

[sly crest]

Good stuff!

[tall forge]

Plus make a wish gave me a trip to japan

[atomic kayak]

The pitch is it gives you a solid level to play an established character (in multiple ways of your choosing). Reasonably at most they are still only at best a local level hero, but depending on the setting (read: most settings) they are reasonably still near completely unknown, much like characters in tier 1.

In short: from a narrative standpoint its functionally not a big deal because you can play an unknown nobody at any level, and from a mechanics standpoint there is just enough meat to be interesting. (Really, I do not buy the "you need to be low tier 1 characters to be nobodies" argument i always see. There's not much weight to it)

[tribal notch]

Ok I see this i see this

[tall forge]

I feel 7th is when you get a little past local hero

[crimson gulch]

two of my games that made it to level 20 started at 3, and i regret not starting them at 1, because 17 of my games that started at level one all had a more profound journy than the ones that started higher. Tutorials are skippable but level 1 in my experience is essential to the journy

now, level 0 start, that was not a tutorial either, that was a powerful humbling force

[tall forge]

But thats my way of running things

[atomic kayak]

As an individual? Not even close

[sly crest]

you fond of anime?

[tall forge]

Im half japanese

[hot marlin]

Although, to be fair, a level 1 character can be famous worldwide, and a level 20 character can be completely unknown. Celebrity does not scale with level

[sly crest]

ah

[tall forge]

Yea, got family there that’s all

[jovial shadow]

In practical terms it should usually be the opposite

[minor cargo]

This is the plot of the Cell saga in DBZ.

[worn lagoon]

my experience with levels 1-3 is waiting for them to end

[tribal notch]

Love this🫡

[hot marlin]

Not necessarily! A level 20 character that spent their life avoiding fame, prefering to stay in the shadows? A level 1 character who is the heir to a powerful empire? Both work.

[atomic kayak]

In practical terms in story telling you very often have a bunch of ""high powered"" (in the context of their setting/narratives) who are nobodies/at best individuals of minor local hero status who come together to solve the problems of the world

And level 7 is extremely far from being "high powered" in the context of dnd

[tall forge]

Def, but youre saving at least more than 1 village

[halcyon forum]

I mean level 7 means you typically killed at least one young dragon. That’s a big deal

[south prawn]

Yo! I checked out your YouTube channel last night, really enjoyed your series on combining 2014 and 2024 - that was good stuff. Liked and subscribed

[crimson gulch]

Thank you!

[hot marlin]

Though I would agree that level 7 is basically where you really start feeling powerful and get real agency over the world

[worn lagoon]

starting off as a bunch of scrubs each time gets old fast

[tall forge]

But end of the day, its a setting dependent thing

[tribal notch]

I agree here from my experience lv 7 at most lets say you had 5 players best they would be able to take is a few trolls or somtjing of that caliper

Wearass 5 lv 20 can kill dragons

[atomic kayak]

A lieutenant in the city guard or army, a known thief, a priest at a large temple. A druid who only just left their circle. All extremely reasonable low scale things at level 7 for an individual character.

These are also things people commonly do for level 1 characters

[halcyon forum]

Dragon killing starts around level 4

[worn lagoon]

a wizard who isn't a fresh dropout

[sly crest]

Wereass? That's certainly a choice for a homebrew lycanthrope j/k

[tribal notch]

True but I ment more adult dragon

[hot marlin]

Uh... How are those things not common for level 1 characters? Those are, like, stereotypical level 1 characters that I see all the time

[tribal notch]

Didn't relsies that good one 😂

[halcyon forum]

Adult dragons can be killed around level 9ish

[tall forge]

General believability is a big factor

[crimson gulch]

Young dragons vs level 3 parties is my vibe

[atomic kayak]

Idk about "typically" - possibly for sure. But that applies to a lot of things.

The Folk Hero background is one of the easiest examples of the sort of thing I'm talking about. Where it suggests a level 1 character is some fairly notable local celebrity

[hot marlin]

How does believability factor in this specific situation?

[tall forge]

It helps to feel strong when your character has a “i was important” backstory

[atomic kayak]

I explicitly said they are also common for level 1 characters?

[hot marlin]

Oh, I misunderstood then

Completely misread. Getting myself new eyes, glasses and a new brain

[flint ledge]

How bad is level 20 combat actually? I've heard a few stories but how like much does it get?

[hot marlin]

The problem comes from the DM, not the design. At high levels you need to abandon your assumptions of how combat is supposed to work.

[tall forge]

Its not bad and pretty bad

If you dont learn how combat at that level needs to go, its a slog

[worn lagoon]

lv8-12 combat is fun to run as a dm

[atomic kayak]

Level 20 (and tier 4 combat in general) is extremely fun

[tender fossil]

The best high level adventures are typically more focused on the setting than combat. You want to take them places that shouldn't be physically possible

[worn lagoon]

i can actually throw very threatening things at my players

[atomic kayak]

Even without homebrew things there is a ton the DM can do to provide interesting challenges for players

[hot marlin]

Here: Aspect of Tiamat accompanied by five ancient dragons. Buffed by forty cultists using circle casting. Why? Because screw you.

[tribal notch]

I once ran for lv 20s there was 8 of them my enemy dud one thing and the player went "no i use this ability to counternthay this then lets me smack em for over 100 dammahe"

[minor cargo]

My experience is skewed because I have only played at level 20 with players who are very, very comfortable with the system.

IME level 20 combat feels like any other combat, just with the power dialled up. It’s kind of hard to describe it more accurately than that for me.

[jovial shadow]

Bad? Who said it's bad? There might be bad players who are still struggling to decide on spells or DM's who aren't that good getting exposed, but there's nothing inherently bad about it

[tall forge]

Cause realistically high tier combats end quicker (in terms of rounds) than lower tiers

But if you go in thinking “bigger numbers important!” You create meat sponges

[atomic kayak]

One of my favorite t4 encounters Ive ever done was a pair of mated ancient dragons (gold and red) and their various children.

[tribal notch]

I enjoy doing lv20 its more the balance for the enemy I need to work on

[atomic kayak]

Spellcaster dragons, standard dragons, dragons with magic items. Tons of fun

[hot marlin]

When I started designing a level 20 adventure, I purposefully decided to make it impossible. I decided that the antagonists had thought of every security countermeasures I could think of, had borderline unlimited resources to make those countermeasures.

[sly crest]

that's super interesting. Now I'm imagining them snoring in a heap like some old married couple

[atomic kayak]

Meanwhile its normally the exact opposite. If your higher level encounters are ending in fewer rounds they are not balanced well

[tribal notch]

Im working on a homebrew system for good rp actually cause my players do it really well so il trying tk reward them.for it

[hot marlin]

I think that is the right way. Once you get that, the question becomes how the players manage to beat those odds.

[atomic kayak]

Sure let's go with that! (Were planning in slaughtering a whole kingdom)

[hot marlin]

They are so drastically outnumbered that if they sound the alarm, retreat is the only option. At least, I think.

Once you do that, that's the design part. In game, allow yourself to be surprised

[atomic kayak]

Anyway the real key to t4 combat is enough minions between the rough CRs of 10 and 14

Monsters in that range are of a strength level (generally) where a single t4 PC can solo one or two of them in an effective manner while also being a threat individually if left alone

This enables a lot more dynamic combat

[hot marlin]

Basically: Make base giants your basic mobs.

[minor cargo]

A favourite “trick” of mine at that tier of combat is to use many flameskulls (CR 4). They can use fireball, so it’s very funny (IMO) to drop like 6 or 7 fireballs on the party on the first round.

[pliant sapphire]

Yeah last tier 4 session my DM throw 8 fireballs from 8 spellskulls hah

[atomic kayak]

Druid tying down a pair of adult dragons, Barbarian keeping two giants engaged and away from the rest of the party, monk bouncing around and stunning aboleths so they can't reach the rest of the party

Its a great time

[cursive fjord]

Can some tell me if this is a little strong, if I use an Action and Bonus action in combat I can heal someone {2d4+1d6+(Targets Hit Dice)+8} at lvl 4

[atomic kayak]

Players also tend to love the feeling of dealing with individually powerful enemies on their own

It feels good to solo an adult dragon in the middle of a heated combat

[flint ledge]

I'm assuming Design boils down to needing to try and kill the players and everything blowing up anyway?

[crimson gulch]

i had 5 spellcasters once, the flameskulls went first and each one of them counterspelled a fireball. then the lich was like, MY TURN and dropped a meteor swarm, good times

[hot marlin]

Not an inaccurate way of putting it

[hot marlin]

... They used their counterspell against third level fireballs when they were facing a lich?!

Your players deserved that meteor swarm to the face.

[crimson gulch]

they did not know he was a lich

[hot marlin]

... I often play monk tbh, so I kinda like showing off my evasion anyways.

[atomic kayak]

Man this just makes me want to run some t4 oneshots again

[jovial shadow]

Interesting because Liches don't have access to meteor swarm.

[crimson gulch]

Teir 4 is so fun, i just closed out a level 20 campaign

[atomic kayak]

Its bar none the most fun level range to run as a DM

[crimson gulch]

of corse they do, they are max level spellcasters, the Monster manual is Typical examples of monsters not the only way they ever exist

[minor cargo]

Oh counterspelling a PC when they aren’t expecting it can absolutely change the tone of combat. I love it.

I have an encounter coming up where they’ll face against a caster. I’m very excited to pull a “it counterspells your healing word; the party member stays down.”

[atomic kayak]

I love vomiting 30 yetis onto a party as warmup

[rough basalt]

My Monday group fought an archmage last night which was fun

[jovial shadow]

Oh you homebrewed

[atomic kayak]

Remember kids

Counterspell that in combat Revivify

[rough basalt]

Counterspelled my first healing word. And my 2nd one. And 3rd one.

[cursive fjord]

So im playing a Aasmir, and they get the Light Cantrip but its assigned to Charisma automatically, why would that matter? Im just curious what you would use that for on specifically that cantrip.

[swift wren]

Remember, attacking characters making death throws is healthy enrichment for players.

[atomic kayak]

Whether or not something will attack a downed player- variable, dynamic, can be fun

Counterspelling revivify for the first time against a party - makes them literally never want to try using it in combat again

[thorn abyss]

Wanna hear something amusing?

[jovial shadow]

It's a carry over from 2014 when you could cast it as an offensive spell

[crimson gulch]

as directed by the monster manual yes.

MODIFYING CREATURES

Despite the versatile collection of monsters in this book, you might be at a loss when it comes to finding the perfect creature for part of an adventure. Feel free to tweak an existing creature to make it into something more useful for you, perhaps by borrowing a trait or two from a different monster or by using a variant or template, such as the ones in this book. Keep in mind that modifying a monster, including when you apply a template to it, might change its challenge rating.

For advice on how to customize creatures and calculate their challenge ratings, see the Dungeon Master’s Guide.

[rough basalt]

Ye for my Archmage I swapped spells out for lore reasons

[jovial shadow]

As along as you increased the XP value, and didn't scree your players

[flint ledge]

You know in my head I was thinking demon lords or archdevils would be appropriate but looking at the stats uh... I feel like that might not do the trick unless there's a ton of minions

[crimson gulch]

I run games full time professionaly, I got it handled

[jovial shadow]

The CR are the just the lowest difficulty for the monsters. You can modify them, as long as you increase their XP

[hot marlin]

Of course there's a lot of minions. They're "lords". A lord is someone who commands a significant amount of people

[atomic kayak]

Counterspell and dispel magic namely

[crimson gulch]

Dispelling or countering a cantrip is unaffected by the original casters stat

It's based on the level of the spell, or for 2024 counterspell a con save

[cursive fjord]

Only thing I could see is maybe a save with that stat if you walk into magical darkness but I thought even its gets put out because its a cantrip

[atomic kayak]

Technically speaking most spells being cast have some sort of stat associated

Not always, but most.

Even if there isnt anything directly in the spell associated with a stat

[minor cargo]

The last time I did this, they were fighting mind flayers and duergar (who can naturally be invisible). So that allowed the duergar to melee hit a downed character for the auto-crit and thus 2 death fails - all from a source that just “appeared” in the middle of the fight.

[rough basalt]

Ye the poor bard wasn't surviving those counterspells since he had two levels of exhaustion.

[drifting zodiac]

Hi

[jovial shadow]

Doctor Doom has arrived

[knotty vine]

My actual name is Natasha so whenever I found a dnd character with the same name i thought it was pretty cool

[tall forge]

Un tashas you

How’s it going, Na

[drifting zodiac]

Yes like always I will be here think of me as idk the guy who never graduates the class

[hollow stone]

bro got turned into sodium

[knotty vine]

Tasha’s name was originally Natasha

[tall forge]

You could say i made them

salty

[hollow stone]

no that'd be NaCl