#dnd-discussion
1 messages Ā· Page 378 of 1
Perhaps
The point was not for greasy to be unkillable
The point was for his concentration to be really hard to break
Can he cast grease
He can cast Grease 10 times per day for free
Not sure how likely this is also, but I could also mention Cloud of Daggers, spells to immobilize someone, and Subtle Metamagic
If my DM is explicitly going this far out of his way to counter my character specifically then I'm not playing in his games anymore
Can Minor Illusion make an opaque, one way window?
Greasy was not OP and nearly died plenty of times
Don't take it too heavily. Sometimes I just see a character like that and I already try and poke at it a few times
Now THIS, I'm curious how
It was a high level high difficulty adventure
What's the difference Between a Genie and a Djinn?
A Djinn is a specific type of genie I think
Yeah a Djinn is just an Air Genie
Okay, I could imagine that if that was the outcome you mentioned. But that tells me very little about what specifically could even smack around Greasy
We were on a giant hell cube that had numerous sources of enfeeblement and was full of high CR fiends
At levels 10+ it's not uncommon for enemies to have +8 or so to hit
So an enemy rolling something like a 28 to hit is not uncommon
Hmmm... fair enough
I suppose I should ask, then: what spells could be so important that you are this intent on preserving Concentration for?
I fully accept my DM finding silver bullets or weaknesses for my character, even targeting them.
If a young dragon has legendary resistance I take it as a challenge.
We got the bad ending of that adventure where Greasy (who was already Neutral Evil) was corrupted and compelled to take the throne of the Bone Lord who was the former ruler of the hell cube once we killed him, as Greasy had fallen into a hundred foot deep pit and the party couldn't get him out so they left him there. So after the party left Greasy had found his way out of his pit, took the throne of seven faces, and became the new hellish evil ruler of the inter dimensional hell cube (bad ending)
To an extent, I agree. This feeling goes for both sides when DM or party adapts to problems and uses a specific spell or tactic in response to it
There's a difference between the DM poking at your weaknesses and explicitly going out of their way to hard shut down your character
Lvl 1 fog cloud
its too good
If my DM wants to shut down my character for an encounter I'm totally ok with that my character is freaking broken lol
Okay well I'm not because that's not fun
Phantasmal Force.
The DM can poke at my characters weaknesses to ensure the game is balanced but hard countering my PC and shutting him down entirely in such a targeted way when he's not even that OP is just not fun
Having a high AC isn't OP, being good at concentrating isn't OP
Suggestion
nope, it can be worked around with other things.
either status effects, elemental damages or other stuff
All of that... for Fog Cloud 1...?
AC dont make you impossible to kill, just a bit more hard
Tomorrow is my last session before the boss fight starts which is going to take 3 sessions, each of which are 2 and a half hours long
a big fog cloud and if one of your allies have some capacity to find the enemies, its literally a carnage playground
glhf
I didn't use fog cloud
Hold on now, Fog Cloud is a good spell. Giving your entire party the ability to disengage, or blocking LoS while you cast spells is kinda crazy.
Thx we'll need it we're fighting an alien God
I don't know exactly how they could find it. Care to enlighten?
Party of 5 at level 20 we'll be fighting an alien God
Wouldn't you need LoS for most spells too?
Bat with blind sight:
I'm sad that my campaign is coming to an end this was my first ever campaign
A dwarf with Tremorsense in a fog cloud can go hard
Hunter mark, true sight, mark the enemy with some spell, put a flare on him and the whole party will look at him through the fog
poke; my last name is mewes
Well, that's when you'd use a familiar or something to be your eyes.
arrows with bells to heard him
Ok?
do you know anything about pokemon?
do you play them first gen yet
they have a second generation of pokemon now!? what are they up to like 200 species now?
there is... a ton of generations...
I believe that was the joke
Oh...
I'm somewhat familiar with the mechanics if you need help with that
i am joking, tho only mostly, i played mostly blue and a little soulsilver
Are Dhampirs classified as humanoids?
I play Dungeons and Dragons
Yes
That Magic Jar scroll I have at level 8 is looking mighty tasty
an excellent choice
"Pathfinder is better š¤ "
Out of curiosity
What are my odds of finding PbP games? Especially one on one settings
Impossible to say. Plenty of places to look, though. Advertising yourself as someone's solo player might be a tricky one to word right.
Well, one can only hope I did good enough
I've never had luck finding PbP games
Wait I thought wizards could take sanctuary
Nah
This guide I'm following for my character build is so buttcheeks...
Like yeah let me prepare WAY more spells than I'm allowed to AND from other class' lists
what's the guide lol
Why follow a guide and not just make your character how you want to
Are you getting this build from a YouTube video perchance
Those things are not mutually exclusive.
No... more like a reddit post...
that explains it 
Some people get crazy choice paralysis. I would never follow a build guide but I get why others would
D&D Reddit 
Who takes a level 1 spell at level 8 Wizard genuinely š
Someone whose DM doesn't supply enough scrolls to learn from 
There's a lot of great level 1 spells that scale well into higher levels
For real DMs, give your wizards scrolls and spell books
All of the scrolls my DM has given us have coincidentally been spells I already know š
Like I took Hypnotic Pattern and Counterspell RIGHT before recieivimg them as scrolls.
If nothing else those can be used as free casts
Basically all of our loot is random
"Oops we start to fight dragons and I forgot to take absorb elements"
Remember, you can caste haste in a creature and break conc in the same turn for a free non Save Stun
strong wizards keep shield, absorb elements and silvery barbs all the way until level 20
has to be willing
You pick those up at level 5 and below
The target has to be willing
Feather fall and detect magic are also extremely good utility
oh you mean they picked up a new 1st level spell at level 8? lmao
they wont know and you can act it up like you are betraying your party
Taking all three of these at once as funny as heck tbh
And it wasn't even on the wizards spell list
Your reaction is loaded lol
I feel like most enemies won't be that dumb
lets you cover all your bases
yeah no dog, people arent dumb and just let someone cast spells on them
Well ok if they were given the option to learn a spell not on their spell list and took it then itās fair imo
you would be surprised and animals wont understand it
I doubt animals would be willing
Animals won't be willing targets
Nope. It's just a mistake. It says in the guide to just add it to your spell list when you level up. Not a ruby weave gem situation or anything.
Animals will see magic and probably react similarly to how they would fire
Fight or flight immediately
If I am going to make an enemy willing with Suggestion, I am casting Feign Death or Nystuls Magic Aura
okey, if it isnt the haste its going to be the meteorite meat swarm.
20 cows from the sky.
nystul's š
animals would treat any spell from you the same
Also why cast Haste and then drop concentration when you can just cast something like Hold Person or Tashas Hideous Laughter
Or fireball
And get the same effect with less steps
I have a ring of spell storing, which I'm going to steal my paladins spells with. She has command prepared.
She's a new, not very technical player, that hardly uses her spells.
Like I'm a new player too, I just break games.
Please note we have #character-discussion to go over build ideas or #optimization for working out builds with high capicity to do all the things, tests maths and try to "break games"
Golly I missed this server
has anyone actually tried out the nerds adventures?
What adventures?
Can amyone help me make a circle of the moon plasmoid for my next campaign
I'd make sure with the dm that spelljammer species are allowed tho
A lot of dms don't allow them ime
All dnd adventures are nerd adventures
I see no lie
What level y'all think is the best to start on a campaign?
3,5,and 7 are the best imo
I'm a level 1 purist unless its a shorter game
As a DM, I prefer running from level 1. As a player, I like starting at level 3.
1 for new players, 3 and above for anyone remotely experienced
Although it also depends on the campaign
ooh depends.
1-3 is basically the tutorial levels, to gently ease in brand new players. 3 makes the best 'starting low level'.
I agree with echo that 5 and 7 are good jumps from there.
Maybe 17 for the highest starting level.
I started my avengers campaign at level 10 and my Necroheim campaign at level 13
I believe for my games if PCs want their subclass they gotta earn it
1 is fun for setting a dangerous tone to the game
Unless its a short game, then itd be 3,5,11,17 or something maybe
most of time i would say 3
Access to subclass, give them some fredom with some lil equipment and that it is
I would put a first mission that if they do really well they get access to a common magic item, something giga basic
a cloak of billowing or smt like that
I kinda miss my Avengers campaign :(
Yeah, but with level 1 you cant throw a fireball at them and expect them to survive /hj
One of my players dislikes starting at low level after having played that over and over. So jumping to 15 or 17 gets straight to that high level play.
Personally I love lower levels and can get a bit stressed having to figure out a new PC at high levels.
I wouldn't throw a fireball at my level 1 players
Dropping the deck of many things on a level 1 party has made me more radical, but level 1 purist still
At level 1 and 2, that damage dice for my enemies is never going to exceed 1d10
I think the highest damage die ive done to a level 1 pc was 2d12
The wizard with 8hp after receiving max damage: 
I don't like the whole earning your subclass thing because not all PCs are motivated by achieving impressive feats or proving themselves.
I dont mean ingame i mean out of game
That is when i would say to my players, be ambitious
Make your Pc ambitious in something, anything.
They gotta prove to me they can handle the power of level 3 pcs
I do agree with the notion of "earn your level"
So you're going to require they play ambitious characters?
That kinda pigeonholes their narrative and roleplay
I'll say 1 or 2 because the first two adventures are gonna be single session deals at my table, welcome to the world, get to know each other. Gives us time to learn who's who, option to change builds around, etc.
Kinda, have an ambition is important at the end of the day
The last campaign I've played, (starting at 1) I almost killed my rogue friend with a eldritch blast
My level 1-2 pace is very varying
it help to fuel the characters motivations
That's why you don't let players pvp
I've had them hit level 3 in like session 3, then another in session 5
not all the time, just few key moments tho
Same. Sometimes I spend a single session on it, other times I ran 3 months straight with my players at level 2
i had to grapple my paladin that got cursed, it was so one sided that i found it funny
Can be fun sometimes.. I always try not to outright kill anyone tho
The players just couldnāt get a grip on the mechanics until month 2, but idm
ye thats why im a level 1 purist
I guess forcing them into having specific motives is one way to encourage them to have motives
I was very proud of them when they finally hit level 3
Now theyāre level 8, oh how my babies have grown up
id get so frustrated by that ngl
Very valid
i accept any ambition, even the most complex or the most basic ones
"i want to be the strongest" to " i want to have my kingdom where people would be free from the evil and dangers of this world"
I think you mean motivation
If you dont have a driving motive to adventure then why are you adventuring?
Although I do acknowledge the line between them can be thin
You can have a motive without being an ambitious character
No hokes?
If it's a longer form campaign you would need something more than "I wanna earn 20 gold"
Motive and Ambition are different words that mean different things
My girl Victoria has a goal, but she is the least ambitious person Iāve ever seen
" i needed fast money" its a classic honestly
You can have a character who is motivated and isn't ambitious
Motivated and Ambitious don't mean the same thing
Now im motivated
Now I'm Ambitious
Yep, ambition can fuel motivation
And if you're pcs motivation is earning 20 gold then why not just go work the docks?
She literally had to be told by her teammates to keep a staff of baphomet bc she was perfectly content with her old staff. (Out of character we all agreed to take the staff but we knew in character Vic wouldnāt be bothered)
That's the example you presented not the one I'm defending or pushing for
My ambition is eternal
You're plugging that specific motive into what I'm saying when I never did
Well I'm presenting an example of a motivation thats not ambitious
"i was bored, so i went to do adventures"
One might say put these foolish ambitions to rest
In order to risk your life of your own choice for something you need to either have zero care about mortality, partially forced by circumstances or a powerful enough motivation that may border on ambition
"I was bored.. so that's how I ended up killing God and saving the land" - the unmotivated adventure
"i like adrenaline and get paid, adventures give me both"
Maybe my Fighter is old and wants to retire and hates adventuring and has no desire to prove himself or be a legendary champion, but is still delving into dungeons and slaying monsters because the land is unsafe and he feels that he can't retire yet while it's unsafe
That character has a Motivation but isn't Ambitious
Narrator: "He was very motivated, he just was never taught the word motivation"
You could argue the desire to face the dangers of evil and protect the land is ambitious
Samwise Gamgee is highly motivated but not that amibitous I'd say as an example.
I do agree though that not all motivations are ambitious
Requiring the players to have an ambitious motivation forces their narrative and roleplay into a specific direction
It restricts their creative freedom
Well, maybe, with how he thought he could get back home again on lembas bread, but still. He's mostly out there because he made a promise to help and he's loyal.
Which may be fine for some plots but requiring it as a baseline is something I wouldn't recommend
That is the funny part, they can change through the adventure
And if a player makes pcs that leave in a session cause he got 5 gold? or some very simple motivation that seems like the player is just trolling
There is Character Development
"OK ok pcs you win... 6 gold"
I think when we get down to it outside of camaraderie thereās not a lot of reasons for a party to stick together long term past like level 10 or so. You have to just kinda downplay that and roll with it.
My warlock is an adventurer because of her pact.
My druid was an adventurer because she had nothing left to live for (she gained things to live for).
My bard is an adventurer because he wanted to be a hero like in his stories he read.
I love coming up with fun reasons other than "money". Money becomes boring and achievable pretty fast to me.
I mean, not gonna lie, I often make PCs who have less of a solid motivation and just a severe lack of self presevation or understanding of their own mortality.
'This will be fun'
Then you have a player who clearly doesn't care about the story of the game or their character
Visit #find-a-game for everything you need to start your search, including:
- Instructions for finding a game here on the server (including how to post in our #looking-for channels).
- Suggestions for finding a game outside of this server.
- Basic advice to help you in your hunt.
Ye the "idc if i die" is probably the easiest call for adventure
At first a character would be ambitious about being strong just to feel proud of himself but end up getting in situations where he understand, there is not better way to be strong than protecting others or smt like that
A level 10 adventurer should be able to live like a king in most places without much trouble. Not many motivations hold up there.
It is, but what's the goal of this example?
A level 10 fighter would be a really good bodyguard for aristocrats and kings
I feel like by that level there are threats that go under āextreme circumstancesā
a level 10 adventurer would be good at sleeping outside the town(s)
That's why you don't usually have games go from 1 to 20 without the driving plot changing
Thing is you could always just ignore them like 90% of other high level individuals
Yeah. She's a Kitsune, her clan got wiped out, and she was on the run from the Elven Kingdom that took out her family. So she figured she'd go to the material realm (as she was in the Wilds) and see if there's something interesting to do. Found a civilization in the middle of a desert that had an adventurer's guild, found a hot guy, stuck around for the thrills.
and you think this is okay how?
𤷠It's her reasons.
Why isn't it okay?
What's not okay about it
Yeah, that's a reasonable back story.
It's a story. Stories, especially in dnd, aren't always sunshine and rainbows. In fact, normally they aren't. Cuz what sane person becomes an adventurer?
When you got nothing left, I can reasonably see someone throwing caution to the wind and joining up with an adventurer they find attractive.
I mean prioritizing fun after your family gets wiped out is an odd tonal shift but there's nothing wrong with that. I would maybe take the angle of going to the Material Plane to escape this hostile faction and taking up adventuring as a way to stay on the move and hone her own skills.
A desperate one
Tell us more
It's one to work on inuniverse too- like gaining closure for her clan, not pinning too much motivation on her partner- but backstories can be flawed.
Flawed ones can even give more room for drama and development.
You can have romantic plotlines without them going 18+ explicit
Like my Rogue in Eve of Ruin. Her driving motivation is killing Vecna so Bane can say he's stronger than Vecna and my contract with him ends.
I mean she's dead now. But every adventure she went on, she wrote a letter to her clan about what she did and how much she missed them.
Her last thoughts were the last letter she wrote in her mind about how she will be joining them soon.
Not everyone deals with loss in the same way, and tbh I feel the āmy family was killed and I seek revengeā backstory is criminally overused
Amulet of Proof against Detection and Location
Signet Rings of Blindness, Deafness, and Silence (Set)
Seems the amulet has been just barely dethroned.
Romance is normal. Perfectly valid to not want to RP it personally, but it's gonna exist. And it exists without going explicit.
She was a very deep character overall. Even if she didn't seek revenge for her family.
A story in which someone loses their family and is trying to make peace with it although it obviously is destroying them inside, or is acting out wildly to cope with the pain would be a good change of pace.
woah
i appreciate the dedication
I love romantic plotlines and hate that they never happen at my table because everybody else's mind immediately drops to the god damn gutter. People can love each other without engaging in explicit stuff all the time.
Oh, come on. You mean you don't like a stack of 30+ PC sheets who all share the same last name, class, and backstory of 'my cousin died on this adventure, so i'm here now for revenge/ to finish the fight'?
I like romantic plotlines and reason I won't do them is roughly same as that
I don't trust people to be mature enough about it.
Ngl long romantic plot lines make me super uncomfortable at the table but if others like them thatās none of my issue. Do what you enjoy.
Thats why you test the waters and if they can't stay mature you stop it
I don't see why to shut down the idea at the get go
A lot of my PCs end up in queerplatonic relationships anyway >.>
I end up just shutting down the idea in general cause I'd rather not test the waters.
The "hot guy" was being played by my boyfriend so I trust him to be good about it.
It's also on a Westmarch so everyone has a love interest there for the most part.
If I had a nickel for every dead relative being avenged in a backstory Iāve read, Iād be a rich man
I don't plan it, but eventually we'll sit back and go... wait aren't these two just.. like.. kinda a couple already? Be it domestically, life partnership, or so on.
I just don't really RP enough for stuff to happen either
My Wizard's death scene made the whole table tear up and it wouldn't have gone that way if he didn't have a budding romance with the tavern owner who he uttered his last words to telepathically as he died
I do have a developing romantic relationship between a character of mine and anothers' that actually isn't my boyfriend for the first time ever.
It was fully developed ICly, unplanned, so I thought it was cool.
Lost love is a great story
be better, "this guy have a debt with my family, a big one. Im searching him and making him pay"
Its the BBEG that didnt paid when he visited the family restaurant, he is going to meet the fury of the Baker Wizard and his delicious army
I'm sure your table was loving it through the tears
Tho I do have PC backstory and epilogue if my rogue survives and gets what she wants involving romance. Just nothing actually that would be present
Yeah it was fire as hell we had to pause the session for like 20 minutes so people could recollect themselves
Everybody loved Erlymer the oddball wizard
Like I have a Monk who needs money to get his wife Regenerated so she can live normally again after some grave injuries.
I don't think I'd ever bring romance to the table. Inwould absolutely have a romantic love interest in my background current or loss but not as something I want in game.
I think, if played right, romantic relationships in dnd bring some fun dynamics. As long as they are both between consenting individuals that don't feel pressured into it.
But I agree that it works a little better with a Westmarch or similar setting where you won't be hearing them flirting over the table and making everyone awkward. š¤£
People have no idea the story beats they're missing out on by having a hard no tolerance stance on romance plots
You don't have to roleplay flirting to have romantic plotlines
Like when my bf and I have characters together, we leave the romantic stuff in our roleplays off table and just play relatively normally at the table, other than clearly favoring each other here and there.
I just have a hardline on one's involving me.
yeah.... i saw a short animated about it, It would be resumed in "You want to have 4 to 5 adults flirting with each other in an adventure game?"
I absolutely agree. Just unfortunate reality that there are so mamy immature people out there
My players can do them amongst themselves if they want.
And I don't mind being witness to them in other games.
That's very valid.
Found it hilarious and revealing in some ways.
Why is this the assumption
The Fighter in my Monday game and the Monk whose on hiatus are partners.
Why do people think that's how it would go down
Yup my players can romance eachother but nothing explicit.
I totally get not wanting to hear two people flirt with each other all session long. That's one reason why we don't (also it's awkward).
Fade to black all day any day
Most people who play D&D are socially awkward anyways why do people think it'll immediately turn into raunchy vulgar roleplay
its what it said in the short, i think it would be different or in other ways, like my potato fighter flirting with a dangerous lady doing something strong and dumb
As far as I allow is dirty jokes in character as long as they're sparing and not like disgusting but just "come on" laugh kind of ones.
"Hey there baby cakes"
𤣠𤣠I can't
Like an occasional quip or something
Fail 1 in charisma
"Hey Fall, from which floor did you angel?"
Wassup
If it's been talked about in session zero or the group has a precedent for such jokes before gaming, I think it'd be fine
I don't mind IC flirting- feels IC same as opinions and values of the PC that don't match the player. I just feel like I'm playing dolls and making them kiss if I'm controlling both (NPC and PC for example). 
I just think it's a shame that so much storytelling potential gets completely shut out over people's assumptions of how others will roleplay certain story elements
Never thought about it like that. Makes sense tho.
That is part of the reason right there tbh. In my experience it is the people with the least romantic experience or access are the ones who take it too far or make it uncomfortable.
I already had a romantic plot line between two NPCs but it was purely a "this NPC cares about this NPC, please save the NPC or this NPC would be sad"
I know it can be done well but ive had a couple very uncomfortable experiences that make me prefer to avoid it altogether. Itās a real campaign ruiner when it goes bad.
I just think it's weird that we as a community are more okay with people describing their character slashing a person's throat or casting heat metal and making a man's chain shirt melt to his flesh than we are somebody roleplaying some flirting of all things.
Ye I mean I donāt really count that as romance, thatās just people having ties. I donāt want to watch roleplay of people flirting or anything further really though.
I think a lot of people nowadays have little romantic experience and there's like a "cringe wall" I like to call it.
Me telling myself how much I love myself cause I'm role-playing my own NPCs 
sad that is true, but yeah, another thing to add to the list
I do remember in a westmarch watching a somewhat awkwardly RPed relationship between PCs that was kinda like watching kids play dolls (And y'know those players might have been pretty young) and thinking 'Damn girl, I'm gonna have to romance you just to stop this.'
Although, TBF, as an Aroace, I have personally very little experience- I'm just going from fiction and media here and what I'd like to read in fiction.
I've been in one romantic relationship in my life and it ended in two weeks because I forgot I had a girlfriend, so I've functionally got no relationship experience and even I'm not so icked by romance plots in a made up story
The cringe wall as I like to call it is this thing built up from stuff being seen and spoken as "weird, don't do it" and a lot of people even if they don't want to, it can end up effecting them acting as sort of a wall that they feel uncomfortable or cringe climbing over.
do it funny
"here dear, i killed this owlbear and took his feathers for make a pillow for you rest your beautiful face"
"we have owlbear meat to eat for 2 months tho"
Itās just preference and what youāre used to I think. And it depends how itās handled. Like if someone was going super in depth of how they killed a creature or was like hyper relishing in it I would still feel uncomfortable probably. Itās the same for romance.
I've got the opposite experience but I agree. I'm afraid of the immature people not the concept or romance in a rp game
Then communicate
Except with an extra layer because I feel like often people donāt completely keep themselves out of the roleplay
Talk to them. Say things at the session 0.
(Turns out though I apparently could not beat the Rizz of the psychopath who burned down the inn and declared his undying love and that he'd kill everyone if she didn't marry him. >.>)
Damn. What a romantic
If i end up in a game with people I don't know I absolutely will! Ngl it foes sound fun.
"Hey guys how do we feel about romantic plotlines? Roleplay that falls into X territory is off limits"
Strahds approval meter definitely went up by 2 points
they always love "Bad Boys"
It happen
Yeah, fair enough girl, I'm sorry, I can't serve that drama.
You are worth more 
I'd probably be open to it nowadays.
My character has a mad crush on Strahd but he won't give her the time of day (night?)
He just playing hard to get obviously
My rogues epilogue is just becoming a level 20 housewife if she survives.
Burn down his castle and declare your undying love.
Strahd see you approaching with crazy love eyes
Strahd: Okey guys, i need to fake my death and i promise to never do bad things anymore, PLEEEEAASEEE!!!
Level 20 Rogue Wife with Level 0 non-adventurer partner
It was some pretty funny roleplay when he first appeared. She's a Reborn tried flirting with him and he blew her off for someone else and she was all like "It's because she's alive isn't it?!"
"Its because she is warm and had blood going through her veins?"
Pretty much. Her intention is to just find a guy she agrees with, and settle down in some city. Silverymoon probably.
"i can be warm too" Turn herself on fire
Not the angle I was taking
That's a nice thought, could be what is also running through her mind as she dies in combat, if that happens
Tho her idea of courtship is like "Hey. Here's 80 platinum coins. Marry me and keep your mouth shut about anything you see me do that a normal housewife wouldn't."
I'm in
In her head, that'd be the correct proposal.
I think the only time I've been weirded out by a romance was one that was, again, like someone playing dolls like in a text based server:
Lady: I love you so much sweety kisses and giggles
Guy: you are a good wife.
And then finding out it was a mum and son, where the mum didn't want her son RPing romance with anyone online (fair), so romanced his PC with hers ...Okay. I.. can see the logic. I guess. I just. Okay.
Objectively correct
"so im being paid for being a husband? Damn..."
"Okey, i wont ask from where you got DRAGON MEAT for our dinner"
Honestly, most would probably accept that offer
Yes.
Well should've read the fine print.
that 80% would turn into 100% if romance is also included in that offer, who wouldn't want a date night with a level 20 rogue?
@tribal night go to #non-dnd-topics
Isn't like... divinity 2 made by the same people as baldur's gate?
Yes but there's channels specifically for those
This channel is specifically for D&D the TTRPG discussion
#baldurs-gate-3-spoilers is the BG3 channel
The fine print that the metaphorical husband wouldn't read over the money.
"At least 3 kids, you only eat what I make, you could be killed by bad people like my last husband, I am not liable for the resurrection costs."
Divinity is not D&D, no. You can talk about it in #non-dnd-topics
I'd take that offer, for sure
Divinity will not be dnd, and will not be associated with WotC
Ah thanks for the clarification
Deal! Deal! Deal!
because I thought they were saying Baldur's gate isn't dnd related
I'm in!
that nearly threw me in for a loop
Honestly, deal
yeah me too, wont even thought of denying it
I wanna be a father!
Gives you the 25,000gp bill whenever a level 20 Wizard shows up on the doorstep and disintegrates you
BG3 also has it's own channel! #baldurs-gate-3-spoilers
It's pretty much the same imo, just baldur's gate is for non creative people imo
That's a take for #non-dnd-topics
and that level 20 wizard was her old party member
no baldur's gate is specifically geared toward an older consumer
I don't think we have a Wizard actually
Well, no discounts then
Baldurs Gate 3 is geared towards people who like fantasy RPG video games
Yeah baldur's gate is just a tabletop game turned to a video game
D&D also includes related media like the novels, video games, movies and so on
Tho we are allied with Alustriel, Tasha and Mordenkainen so I certainly do know some powerful spellcasters.
Which is on topic for here, but to avoid spoilers, BG3 has #baldurs-gate-3-spoilers
(We also have #dnd-media which needs more love)
BG3 is pretty true to 5e.
Really? I thought it was similar in DnD, 100% accuracy no def not
It's mostly accurate
But it's still practically the same game somewhat, just not at all an exact replica
They have their own changes and whatnot because it's a video game rather than a tabletop game.
Either way this channel is for the tabletop roleplay game D&D
And as someone who got into D&D through Neverwinter Nights, I'm absolutely saying that it's D&D related and has overlaps (although BG3 does not have the persistant world RP servers NwN did, which were basically just westmarches on a VTT)
Bg3 brought me here(not exclusively but mostly) and yea feels very different
I see, I was not clarified on that at all
You weren't initially but I tried to
Then I'll just leave it to DnD exclusive, no more Baldur's gate talk from me in this channel
Oh, so a discount is on the table
If you ever want to look through the channels for one suited to what you want to talk about #channel-guide is very handy as we ddo have a few.
But to clarify, while we do have #dnd-media as a more specific channel, things related to D&D TTRPG (Novels, games, movies) are still ontopic for D&D.
Alustriel maybe.
She'd probably have her do something
My rogue doesn't care for mordy and doesn't trust Tasha (not for the reason you probably think)
Why's that?
All things considered, pretty good deal, 80 platinum, at least 3 kids, level 20 rogue by your side, yeah everyone would take that offer
What's the best duo classes in yall's opinion?
True
Duo Classes? you mean Multiclass?
I typically run monk and ranger
I know how obnoxious she is and I'd still take it.
You can talk about Drizzt and not be limited to just talking about his rare TTRPG book appearances for example.
No as in two players/characters with two different classes
that's what I meant
Definitely, also, if she gets attached, (if she does secretly care but doesn't show), she might protect from the bandits
Maybe barbarian, mage
Ohh, then... probably Bard and a Sorcerer/Cleric and a Fighter
So like, a pair of one PC is a Fighter, the other is a Wizard?
(Are we gonna ship 'em?)
if so, 100% Cleric and a Fighter
Maybe...?
Funky couple why you suggested it?
Artificer and Wizard sounds funny. Both view magic from a scientific lens.
Paladin and Rouge is a classic enemies-to-lovers trope right there.
I was more thinking of twin sisters in mind not an adventurer couple
Well then maybe rouge-ranger could be something interesting
One is born with innate magic, the other had to study it.
Cleric tenderly places their hand on the Fighter's cheek, casts Death Ward
What about Cleric and Mascara? /j
noooooooo!
Hunter's mark from ranger then sneak attack from Rogue, what a brutal combo
What have I done!?
Cool
Sorry, just a joke I canāt avoid making lol
guys help i need a free aesthetic character sheet fast
I've read this before, I think
uhh this isn't really the server for that, maybe check online?
DnD sessions with couples are either cringy or they make the campaign more hilarious
i have tried
Yeah but even with that the Ranger is kind of a shitty class
I will not tolerate this ranger slander
i have looked i cant find anything
Excactly
Ranger works just fine. And can be pretty murderous in my experience.
Rangers are great. At least in my experience they have been
It's funny, I played alot of ranger but not druid
Bugbear Gloomstalker... šØ
Really? I never found a way to make It work for me how did you do It?
I get the techincal number crunch and the meme, but boy is it tiring to hear new players constantly warned off a class that could be perfectly fun to play.
Ive enjoyed each of the three rangers i have played in the last 10 years.. different subclasses and personalities - lots of fun.
I didnt feel outclassed.
Other peoples opinions do not make facts
Play druid Hella fun
Bugbear gloomstalker ranger assassin rogue
Personally my biggest issue regarding Ranger isnāt regarding the class itself, itās that Iāve always wanted more Exploration rules to make Rangers really shine
Mmmmmmmmmm maybe i gotta give the Ranger another go, why not could be interesting
So if I have a question about a race where would I go cause I'm trying to know everything about thread borns
The class has always been good, it just required a lot of work on the DMās part to make Exploration significant. So the Exploration class can shine.
ok nvm i found a character sheet uhh anyone got a good name for a changeling artificer
Yeah, that part is always overshadowed a lot in my opinion
Thread borns? Never heard of them. What do you know so far?
lol
From the crooked moon book it's one of the races that were added to it but finding stuff about it seems to be kicking my butt
It feels like a lot of people see a class that needs some working with the DM and just assume the class won't work. But I feel like most DMs are willing to work with players who are playing classes like this.
The more I play the more realize that the game was balanced in a very specific way for a specific style of play, and it does work for that reasonably well. Itās just that most tables donāt play that way anymore, so some classes can feel really weak in that light.
same happen with rogues in almost same level so...
isnt a "one class thing" at all
Me as also a DM could absolutely work with this but i never understood how excactly
Likely #third-party would be your best bet.
I play a non stealthy rogue 
Thank you
so a fighter with extra steps?
Nah it's monk
Sounds inconvinent
But maybe Is Just a lot weaker fighter
Ranger is a perfectly fine class
thats why you play 2014 where rangers are good (theyre still not bad in 2024 tbh)
Yeah it's not bad, just people has valid points sometimes
I would only like that things like HM or hex be a bit better, but meh, it happen
How I feel after seeing a male human noble paladin build for the 529835902th time:
I don't think I've ever played a Rogue that was actually focused around stealth
funny thing is rangers are stronger than pallies in 5e
Rogues love causing problems
Its a classic, at least isnt an Tiefling rogue//warlock//Sorcerer or ranger
Ranger is Indeed a fine class but, how we discussed earlier It requires a lot of collaboration from the DM which Is often not given
I like to run the unclassic, rogue orc, halfling paladin, dragonborn bard
Wait in a fantasy setting, would people be attracted to a dragonborn bard?
Just any race
There's nothing wrong with any specific race class combo
Exotic sell good so...
Why the hell would you play a Rouge then
Holy moly
Yeah, thatās always been my mindset as a DM. I need to know my players, their characters, and their charactersā capabilities in order to make sure they all have their moments in the spotlight. Ranger always just felt like a little more work to me personally because Ranger was designed for Exploration, but 5E didnāt have a whole lot of rules to help focus on that pillar.
Tell me which of the rogue class features specifically requires you to built them towards stealth
There isn't, I just think running a boring character is well, boring.
If you're going to run human paladin, at least make the character interesting
true, but we cant deny that some races fit better with some classes. Not saying they should go that class but they could and would work better
You shouldn't assume a character will be boring over its race and class
I run other factors other than race and class, what is their character background? What do they do for a living? Their personality?
rogues are heavily dex based which does kinda make stealth an easy choice but you dont have to
Assassin doesn't require stealth it just requires high initiative
My human fighter player is hilarious. He exaggerates his confidence and claims he's this legend(even tho no one knows him)
If it's a generic nothingburger, I absolutely hate it
Even a Human Champion Fighter can be an interesting character if their player does whatever they can to do more than swing a sword
Well i agree its not entirely that but its Just a bit strange to hear a Rouge without stealt
I love running smol girl with biiiig weapon
Some of the people here are extremely closed minded it feels
it's so cute
Self inserting exist too so i wont be too harsh with that and in other way, i kinda understand the classic Human fighter, after killing demons, creatures capable of decimate armies with only strength and will
erm actually a rogue taking stealth is optimal so you umm uhhh :3
It gets bland when I just see it so many times, I beg that it's a good character
But you're writing the character off for being a human paladin without even hearing if their story or roleplay is interesting
I feel like stealth is actually a li'l hard to do in D&D
You're assuming that they're going to be uninteresting before even hearing if they will be or not
yeah a lot of the time it needs the whole party to have stealth which is why PWT is so good
Maybe, but the sneak attacks require you to be stealty to actually do them
If their background is a noble, how can I have my expectations up?
You should read the class
Nope
It always depend of what point of view people make of it too.
in another story, i made an Assimar Warlock celestial, i want to do the classic "im a good guy using not so good magic" or stuff like that
It's pretty abstracted down to a roll, so it's not like it's the most engaging thing to try and engage with like in stealth games where you can do timing or tricks. A stealth narrative is possible, but it feels more like a 'side' thing in D&D rather than a main pillar to explore with mechanics.
I think the hardest thing about Stealth in 5E is that with it being a collaborative game, one characterās great Stealth numbers wonāt help if everybody elseās Stealth sucks
Then just split up lol
Don't be in a big party blob while you're trying to stealth
If it's a well written character then I have no problems with it, I just want it to be interesting
But you're going in with the expectation that it'll be boring because of the race and class
I wanna be smoool girl, smool goblin goober carrying biiiiiiiiiig weapon
You're already going in expecting it to be boring
'engaging thing to engage with'. Hmm... I think I might need sleep?
If it's going to come out interesting, why would I continue to have low expectations?
This is a super common anime trope I don't see how a human paladin is inherently less interesting than this thing that has been done just as much in media
You're saying that I should keep my expectations low even after I heard their character? That doesn't sound right at all
i wrote some, tried to show how he is in that story too so idk if its interesting or not, want to check it?
I think we might be getting some cross communications and assumptions
Hence my point about the game being inherently collaborative. If youāre splitting up to make the most of your own stats, thatās not collaborative.
Nothing is being clear at all, all I'm understanding is that if I'm going to be a hater then hate forever
Wish could cast Zephyr Strike on allies
Again, might be that I need sleep, but I'm not actually even sure what is being communicated
that's why I'm so confused why I should just be a big hater
My curse continues of people reading what I say and acting like I've said something completely different
Be a hater, say that its jordans are fake or smt
(Its this how a patron feel?)
My gnome was a small girl with a big gun. (Thundercannon AU Artificer).
She was also married to the gun, who's name was Bonny.
Bonny screamed people to death.
Because nothing is being cleared up, you didn't explain why it makes sense to continue to dislike something after seeing the character's background instead of changing an opinion
That's not what I said
These are the delights of D&D.
You're insisting I said something that I never said
Aaaaaalrighty then.
I can't help you with that
Let's move on folk.
thats just dnd players in general 
But im comfy in my chaaairrr!!
I literally said, "if the character is interesting then I have no reason to hate it", then you proceeded to say not to hate it to begin with or continue hating it
okey, im making me a coffee, any want one too?
Now I want to make a musical chair puzzle in D&D
Dang, I suddenly feel like playing one of my favorite character concepts
So it's wrong to change an opinion?
I literally never said that though, I'm done talking about it.
Movin' on, now. Find a happier topic.
An Ancestral Barbarian Kobold. King Kobold, King of the Kobolds.
Does small gobbo use big hammer or big gun?
Never, nothing is more nice than understand that one himself opinion could be wrong or someone else could be wrong and help it to change it for better or help to understand better its opinion
I'm just genuinely confused at what they're telling me, not at all clearing things up to me.
These seem to be the only options for small girl big weapon. What other big weapon would be fun?
Remind me to poppy from lol
she is what i have in mind when people say "big hammer small character"
Expand your mind, the possibilities are endless. Small gobbo uses big nunchuck
This is the answer I needed, yet I never saw it.
People just tend to never tell me where they're getting at when I've told my perspective.
i like the modrons theyre cute
Question is, do you wield one or two
Hear me out tho. Giant steel chair
In any way, Time to the most epic quest, the legendary alchemy jug
Modrons are abominations!
so am i doesnt mean i cant be cute
You're not an abomination smh
My Tomb of Horrors game was a huge success and I seriously want to run it again some time
that's what you think :3
Pre-5E modrons are cute. 5E modrons on the other hand are just⦠shudders
2 fleshy 4 me
I love the idea and am too tired to figure out how to make it work, and this makes me sad and inspired.
I'm gonna squishify you
Giant rapier.
New idea to add to a DND carnival
A classic kissing booth, but it's a modron running it
So is that horror or comedy? š
God youre right
if only dnd included rules for how bigger weapons would work /silly
MmmmmmIāll pass
I like to imagine it makes those Wubwuwbwubwub noise when swung around. Like a saw.
"I got the jackpot" scene.
Any character Iāve ever made or will make will pass
Then the stealth part of the rouge is almost nonexistent
Now this is new
Tis not just I! I have passed on the curse.
yeah i never thought id see the day where a dnd player actually read the rules
Did you dance?
kinda...the wording "Sneak attack" is... tricky
Wait until you realize that Rangers have almost nothing in their kit that inclines them towards Dexterity besides starting equipment, and that they're just as effective strength based warriors as a Fighter would be.
if its a reference ot another scene im dead.
I should replay some classes with this new perspective
also multiclass reqs
That too
It could get interesting
tbh tho most str based characters want 12 dex anyways so its fine
Remember folks
9/10 Gamblers quit before they make it big
pfft, Hi Tokii
I think my current Wis based ranger has lower dex than entire party rn
shillelagh?
Magic Stone
TWF is just as effective with strength
hand crossbow is better but yeah thats dex
I don't use Hunter's Mark
Finesse weapons are not inherently better with either stat they can just choose to use either
If i didn't roll poor stats, I would've made my current ranger a Strength-Based one
Then go 14 dex and medium armor
it does if you get heavy armor
Or get heavy armor
Not that, i more tend to understand badly some rules and then when i reread them i just know im stupid
This is like arguing that Fighter is a Dexterity class because Dexterity is good for AC when nothing else in their kit inherently inclines them towards it
You can multiclass and still be considered a "ranger"
Or you can take Heavily Armored feat
You don't need Armor Training for Heavy Armor if you grab Shillelagh. It'll keep you effective until you get Heavy Armor training
Like it appened this time
Aye, but Rangers typically don't want heavy armor because that deactivates roving š
No multiple movement speeds for you
yeah thats better than most dnd players who'll get the rules wrong and insist its everyone else that's wrong about it 
Magic stone is just annoying having to recast it every 2/3 rounds
Taking armor is for Cowards!
I run into the battlefield NAKED!!!!
Yeah and those people would still be their class
A Wizard who takes Moderately Armored and then Heavily Armored is still an 8th level Wizard
I mean, what feat would you take then?
What a true coragious man
It's like saying my House isn't a House anymore because I put a potted plant inside of it
It keeps monoclassing progression for Armor Feats and maybe there's extra magic Armor later
My house isn't suddenly outside
Naked and Afraid?
No...
Naked and Enraged!!!!
lol playing D&D like a FromSoftware game
I am not necessarilly understanding the point of said comment
I start rolling around my enemies 5 bazillion times before getting a singular hit
Letmesoloher core
We all know the True Dark Souls build is Naked and BIG CLUB to bonk with
Barbarian
Indeed.
It'd the most Raging-est time of the year!
I'm gonna make a Heavy Armor Rogue just to ragebait people
Strength based heavy armor rogue
CL1 full CoS playthrough
not if i beat you to it :3 (did it like a year ago smh im too quick)
Me making the Rogue that beats you to death with Hammers
Shield Master Rogue goes hard
I mean, if you are going str based instead of dex, you wouldn't go with Sharpshooter, CBE, or the dex based feats, so that frees up space
I wish Dwarves still had medium armor proficiency it would save me a few feats on this Heavy Armor Rogue
Spoon!
You will ragebait them real good i assure you i get angry just thinking at it
I wish they made a Bruiser Rogue instead of this magical subclasses
My cleric has 13 wis and 18 str and my westmarch tm8s were making funny jokes about it. "Lay on Hands? Nah Lay these Hands" I was dying
If you're not beating someone to death with a Hammer..
Are you even really playing D&D?
Good thing Tavern Brawler exists for Sneak Attack
What does tavern brawler do for sneak attack?
Pummel Strike with Finesse weapon for Bludgeoning + Proficiency for a little more Accuracy
My strength rogue is still going to use Daggers so he can throw them
Big heavily armored tank with a big shield and then a little dagger
Sword and board more like knife and cutting board
"That Rogue seems to be overcompensating..."
I could go for Heavy Armor Greatsword Wizard
That might require a one level dip though
So, hows everyone tonight?
Or a lot of feats
Yeah too many for it to be feasible for me
Featsible
Having to tell a coworker I can't trust them professionally, is not easy.
My stomach still hurts from the feeling
dips are great we love dips
Oh hell, I'm sorry to hear
I'll use the homebrew spell Pink's Big Feat (3rd level transmutation, gain the benefits of an optional feat for which you meet the prerequisites for a durarion of 10minutes concentration) to gain the Heavily Armored feat during combat
I don't know what that means, but oof. Sorry
It's okay. It had to be said. They took no accountability.
It's all good. D&D discord makes me feel a lot better.
Reminds me of a few stories of the fast food chain I used to work at till I managed to quit recently
but thats on an unrelated note
Any particular dnd-general topic you love talking about?
Pinks big... feet >:p
How to traumatize a bard within five minutes or less jkjk
I'm playing....my uno reverse card (I'm kidding, i respect if anyone does genuinely feel uncomfortable)
Hitting this with the skunk emoji has layers to it that people couldn't possibly comprehend
i enjoy having random animals in my most used emojis
I'm weeping...
like its 90% normal stuff you'd expect and then š¦ š 𦨠š¦¤
Emotionally devastated /joking
All awakened animal party, protecting their druid's grove.
though the trauma does remind me, managed to score a new victim- recruit I mean. This shall be fun
Pathfinder fixes this /silly /joking
The Dodo being in there is perfect.
Hmm... generally I'm in the Rules. But character discussion when its how "I' would build something or what feat to pick rather than optimization.
i should use dodo more often
new april fools joke, talk about every tabletop EXCEPT dnd in this channel, the mods will love it trust me
pathfinder fixes this
Vampire the Masquerade fixes this
it's pf2e btw
I'm gonna make you all into Dodos.
Call of Cthulu does it better
whatt even me
nah it's GURPS
Mutants and Masterminds flips the script
more like SLURPS tbh cus it sucks
Why are you the April fool on April 2nd, Tokemisis?
Lancer is just cooler
Mƶrk Borg fixes this
I've got 10 more mins of April Fools.
Its still April first for me
But, I'm the April Fool ALL of April
better make it count
And they finally fixed Pathfinder by adding the Nissan Pathfinder as a vehicle option
Because my Birthday is this month and I get to play the Trickery Cleric
my girlfriend broke up with me, does pathfinder fix this
Do folk make April Fool oneshots?
Yeah, duh.
yes
Actually, Maybe?
tragically my crew wasn't fond of holiday one shots
Yea Mods we are talking about D&D... Diners and Dives
Dwarves and Dwarfs
do fools make april folk oneshots? thats the real question imo
You're sad?
Watch Perfect Blue >:]
Dingos and Doohickeys
Damage and Do-you-have-insurance
Dragons and Diners maybe.
Driders and Driftwood
That just sounds like an indi band.
Depravity and Dismemberment
Dingle and Dorp
Danny and Dilbert
id rather have dinner with dragon tbh, sounds romantic
Dames and Dandies.
I only say that one as the dismemberment song literally came on my playlist XD
Dice & Dice accessories
Doctors and Daddies
I'm gonna harass you in dms until you say hi btw
LMAO
W
Accurate.
Dragons and Dungeons
the romance heavily depends on what kind of dragon
Devils and Demons
Silver Dragons would probably be the most romantic imo
I think ima kill a PC tonight
if it's a green dragon they're just gonna mind control you. which to some is very romantic
speak for yourself
Seems like one of those days the dice are gonna be cruel
Depends on what the dragon hoards
Deceased and Divorced
behold, a dragon that hoards romance self-help books
he'd be a great friend
Oh no, we're gonna have to rescue the dragon.
I have a Dragon hoard starting in my room of collection items
Dragons and Doomscrolling š
Dragon hoard of tech decks
I hear an evil Knight is guarding it in a tall tower. Weāre all gonna have to play princesses to rescue it
My goal is to hit 100 tabletop books by Christmas 2027
Dragon with a hoard of those talking bass things you'd see at a thrift store
Lolol
:0
Rogue's worse nightmare.
Insane goal, and I am here for it
it'd actually be terrifying to walk into a room full of those and they all start going off one by one
half of them are Jimmy Buffet songs
The bard's greatest dream
The Dragon with a Hoard of Hoards
Well, I'm adding at least 3 or 4 books this year.
Imagine a Dragon with a Hoard of Rick Astley cutouts
I'm a Dragon that hoards project ideas
Oof
Hey, do you folks know of the Book Fort dragon?
Book Fort!
Book Fort!
Yeah, met the guy. Real informative
I have at least 12 game ideas for 5e and other systems and I'm gonna just sit on them.
Like a good dragon
Like a what?
Like a what?
I feel that. For dnd alone I already have thoughts for Lamordia, Lorwyn and Tarkir
Dungeons and Dragons but you're just playing Yakuza
Ooh no
Time for some Kareoke
I'm tempted to drop some music from the turn based yakuza games for boss fights.
tfw when someone apparently has ready your post looking for a campaign then proceeds to miss every single important part of your post
can we run DOOM in dnd 5e
Like Wailing Warrior from Yakuza 7
Dungeons and Dragons but the group is playing Terraria as their characters
The real mark of functionality.
"Sudden Death" themes from old video games as boss themes
Dungeons and Dragons is Strange: The game that reinforces consequence and romance
But tis now no longer the first for I, so I'm going to go sleep like a fool.
When your playing spelljammer on a ship that crashes on a ring shaped planet.
We have:
- swords
- shotguns
- demons
ā¦yeah!
And you have to escape it, running into a alliance of Space species
Then you and them awaken a plant species that takes over bodies.
and we fight religiously zealous aliens?
I've come to the conclusion I'm bad at making friends... can someone do it for me?
Yes and the goal is to now detonate the spelljammer to blow up the planet
Dragon whose Hoard is a bunch of empty Newport boxes
And the aliens will devolve into a massive civil war that turns into a whole political schism
Oh man, now I wanna try running a DOOM inspired one-shot š¤
Hmmm..
I'll be your friend :]
Indeed. And the plant species will take over their capital city and become one of the most horrific moments in lore.
Mood
Good taste in class BTW
From the Nike Ad, "Just do it!", socialize, come and talk, you'll make friends here
ngl both the covenant and flood have inspired at least two of my bbegs in campaigns
I legit wanted to do a Spelljammer game with the flood
But I don't have spelljammer experience yet
And the tools don't inspire me.
..
Wort Wort Wort!
Should I be happy that April fools is saying they will be my friend xD. But I think I shall talk in here for a while if you all will have me
Run a one shot where you're stuck on the Rock of Bral after a flood spore crashed into it.
I mean the rule I heard was that it ends after 12
I'm the April Fool, but not a malevolent fool
Just a fella
I think the bigger reason why I'm not running the third game I wanted yet is I'm just too focused on my current two games and my setting guide.
...did someone cast Silence on me or something? >_>
No, but I'll cast it now
No your being heard Bloodline I did actually want to ask about your preferred ranger subclass.
Once the Eve of Ruin game I'm in is over, I'll probably get around to another game.
Gloomstalker, usually
That extra damage and stealth elements pair nicely
I was thinking of that one for a cos game I was about to start... but bad friends see...
Isn't that basically a rogue though xD
Is that a serious question?
I'm still not fully sure what My ranger is... oh dear... have I annoyed someone already
That's what 4 messages
No...?
I just don't know what's the intention from this
Thematically it's sneaky sneaky stab stab for extra damage...
Darting around in the shadows
It's cool! But I havnt fully delved into all the subclaas3s
I'm sorry
What Mastery does a Dagger have? Was it Nick?
Correct
Yeet
By the way, it's pretty unfortunate we don't have a martial weapon that has Finesse and reach (aside from the whip)
Use the whip. It'd be funny
Maybe, but like... you would think someone could make a strong, but light polearm
Toothpick on a whip?
Something that isn't a d4 for damage
Dagger on a whip
idk why ppl complain about whip being a d4 when daggers are too and they get used all the time
Hard to say
Just had one of those moments late at night where I bought a half decent weapon for my Ranger, but forgot said weapon uses strength
Well greetings fellas!
Its the thought that counts
i think all weapons should do the same damage thumbs up emoji colon three :3 :3 :3
surely this will be very balanced
#find-a-game is where you wanna be
If all weapons did the same damage, it'll be the 'same' weapon.
I will also find the group there?
yep!
except many properties are better than others
True. The weapons in '14 were kind of bad for this reason
I've been thinking about a simpler weapon system that only had entries like Small Weapon(d4), Medium Weapon(d10), Heavy Weapon(d12), Long Weapon(d8), and Ranged Weapon(d6) recently. Might be something to consider
Long weapon
hi.
I would've liked it if the Smithing Tools were able to add or remove 1 Weapon Property.
Without homebrew
polearms
this woulda been sweet
Pffff, I guess so. Good thing we have a Cleric
Did get a little bummed out about the ping. Thought it was for my looking for dm post
I'm playing a flame based dragon-born wizard, we're only level two so far so we are just fighting goblins. However, I took control flames as a cantrip, and one of my favourite things to do is to encase the goblins in flame, and my DM is having difficulty balancing it. I think currently they have it as 2d6 fire damage, which can instantly melt them. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to balance it, for the sake of my DM?
(Sorry if this is inappropriate or in the wrong place, I can delete it if need be)
Control Flame shouldn't have damage as an option last I checked?
Yeah it doesn't.
Produce Flame and Firebolt are the Fire damage cantrips you likely be looking for.
theyāre talking about extending the flame into a creatureās space
My suggestion would be to have your dm not homebrew damage like that
That doesn't inherently do a single thing
If you stand in the middle of a fire youāre on fire.
Which doesn't do anything mechanically in dnd
yes it does
Well burning is a thing in 2024.
see the Burning hazard in the PHB rules glossary
It is 1d4.
d4 damage at the start of their turns. thatās what the damage should be for some set on fire @hybrid light
You have to do something that gives that condition.
setting someone on fire does that
You can dip weapons into the flame too
No?
it also says "...provided that wood or other fuel is present in the new location." So unless they are also standing on fuel-like items, you can't just push flame into a creatures space with that spell.
i think alchemist flames do that
Doing what you said does... NOT set them on fire.
engulfing someoneās space in flames doesnāt set them on fire?
It doesn't unless the feature says so or if the dm rules that way.
do you have access to Produce Flame? if so, grab that one for a similar option with prewritten damage. Otherwise, I'd just look at similar damage cantrips and knock it down a die to "balance" also having the utility of the cantrip
That just moves the fire to a different place, the DM determines if it does so. It's just simply a situation where if a DM let you do that, and the feature/spell/etc says so, it does it. Otherwise, it doesn't.
yep, it canāt be done except if the goblin is standing in a very convenient location
Since there is no save or to hit option for any of Control Flames effects, it reads to me as beyond raw and unbalanced to allow it to autohit like that.
That's only for expanding it, one thing I'm not seeing is movement. Is being able to move the flame an expectation just I had or that most people do?
What else with flames can you control if not its movement
Size, brightness, shapes and colours, and if you want you can instantly extinguish it
itās d4 damage that is only able to be done under extremely limited conditions
ones that youāll usually have to set up
Its fuel!
and do you really need a rule that says āif you are standing in the middle of a fire you get fire damageā
I think reading the spell in 2024 you can move it if there is fuel. It doesn't seem unreasonable that a person can't act as fuel
a person cannot act as fuel, i agree with that. but if theyāre standing in a puddle of oil or on top of firewood, iād let it happen
Precisely. However, clothing can be fuel
I wish I could control the flames of my love life š
Most of the time you can't burn anything being carried or worn
ehhh maybe, magic-related fire in d&d usually excludes things carried and worn. itās an explicit exception in fireball, for example
Well, obviously not with that attitude. 
Wait a second, there's bloody sun vampires in dnd?
Most of the time. Only its not written here that one cannot
Context for the combat when I first did it:
I did not use any bonus action and I used very little movement. Most of my turn was with my action; let's call it 5 seconds. My description was that I took the fire from the goblin campfire, formed it into the shape of a goblin, but 20 percent larger, then I set the fire on the goblin; they were instantly cremated.
It was the middle of combat, and my DM didn't prepare for me to do that, why should they, which is why this is a discussion
(Sorry if I ever come off as harsh, I'm not very good at anything social)

True, though the writers probably didn't expect anyone to attack with it
I think rule as intended versus rules as written is at issue here
Yeah
Same issue as Trident of Fish Command, which lets you control 'any creature with a swim speed'
Lolol
your DMās fine to do it as a one time ruling, everyone makes panic rulings lol, but control flame shouldnāt be able to set extra things on fire without fuel in that thingās space, i think. and any damage from being on fire or in a space with fire should just be d4, to match with the burning condition
I'm totally rule of cool there personally. Like it's a 1st level spell that is very niche. I would let you get some damage off of it unless you were trying to abuse it as long as it makes sense to me
I think both my DM and I both like the idea of a fire bender, so I might propose making it into a slightly weaker, but more versatile "create bonfire"
control flames? that's a cantrip right?
Yes, it is a cantrip
me when bear
ya that's not a first level spell fwiw
Oh it is?
yes
I totally misread the block lol
lols, all good
I'm fairly certain there is, or at least was some kind of rule about being able to damage items carried or worn. Like having to overcome a save or something, on top of the usual item hardness / item HP
Bears are fish in dnd
Rangers are fish
any beast with a swim speed not any creature
na it uses a fish as payment to command the bear, clearly 
I'm a Bear, but I'm not a fish
bear is a beast with a swim speed š£ļø
Trident of Fish Command: This magic weapon has 3 charges, and it regains 1d3 expended charges daily at dawn. While you carry it, you can expend 1 charge to cast Dominate Beast (save DC 15) from it on a Beast that has a Swim Speed.
polor and cave bear at least
āthat can breathe water and has a Swim Speedā would fix it mostly
Please lets not get silly and off-topic
true but its funnier like this
Tell me how this looks to you:
When flames are moved into the same space as a creature, that creature must succeed a dexterity saving throw or take 1d6 fire damage and the "burning" condition, then the flame extinguishes
Burning: creature takes 1d4 damage (idk sometime during their turn)
unless you want it to control dolphins or something
Who would be considered the swat team in city guards or maybe baldurs gate?
Flaming Fists
Makes sense
Flaming Fist
it looks fine to me as a houserule
Ready or not x dnd. I've gotten back into ready or not
That would be pretty interesting actually
A campaign where you're a swat team
I imagine it would be pretty brutal
My waterdeep and baldur's gate games are essentially that. BG crew was hired by the Flaming Fists
That sounds fun
Tbh, thats kinda how a lot of parties end up
Sorta comes with the "elite mercenaries for hire" type stuff that dnd tends to have going on often
I'd rather a couple bears be included than exclude the various actual sea creatures that this would exclude
Giant crab!
Giant Enemy Crab time!
i mean should the trident of fish command command dolphins?
Yes. Yes they should. Fish Command is just poorly named misnomer
All I'm saying is when I see an Aquaman type character with a trident, they're riding dolphins and not fish
Nonsense, my sorc doesn't need to, she can become a dolphin for an hour each day
https://i.imgur.com/XrZ1Taa.png
What if it was a really big fish
Theoretically you could ride a sunfish
Pff
The only problem is that they look ridiculous and by extension so would you
That's such a funny picture cause I recall them being particularly slow swimmers as well