D&D 5E Recreating a character in D&D 5e

[WayOfTheFourElements]

I once ran a game in which 3 players played a suit of armor. One player played the head, another the upper body, and another the lower body. My players have decided they want to recreate the character(s) in our upcoming 5e game. How would you handle it?

 

[Nebulous]

Huh. What was the system you used originally for that...concept.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Aside form what numbers - just do what you said.

For the numbers: I'd probably make a paladin (or warlock or EK, depending on what they want to play) and break up the actions. The head can do magic, the body does weapon attacks, and the legs handle movement.

I'm not sure if I'd give them three turns per round (since they really don't get three sets of actions) - finding the right balance of actions would require playtesting, so I would probably start at all of them on the same initiative (so they can move and attack, and not worry about enemies moving away between the two) and just tell the players the action economy is subject to revision.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

Huh. What was the system you used originally for that...concept.

BX D&D. The legs and body were "fighters" and the head was a "magic-user." Only the legs had a movement speed and only the head could talk. They all had a full set of actions. The other characters were a dwarf and a cleric. It worked out fine.

 

[Nebulous]

Well you could go that same route. I'm still trying to wrap my head around just playing "legs" though. So the head could be your spellcaster, and each round would get an action or reaction or bonus action; the "body" is your attacker and manipulator, and gets the same actions. The legs, if you wanted real SPEED, you could be a monk, they get stupid fast movement bonuses. So you would let the legs Dash (I guess?) and they would get to move much further than a normal single player character.

If they're getting full actions they're breaking the normal action economy.

But like the above post mentioned, I don't if you should be giving them a full set of actions. Spell casting, attacking and dashing in the same round would be superhuman. Unless that's what you're shooting for.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

But like the above post mentioned, I don't if you should be giving them a full set of actions. Spell casting, attacking and dashing in the same round would be superhuman. Unless that's what you're shooting for.

Exactly, superhuman isn't what I'm shooting for. In BX it wasn't super human at all; magic-users can't cast spells when engaged in melee and can only cast a few a day. The character played like a normal knight who was good at kick boxing. A little, strange, but fine. Especially because it was jointly controlled by 3 characters.

It was also fun when the different body parts would split up. Sometimes, the legs went one way, the arms bought a wheelchair and rolled himself around, and the dwarf wore the helmet. Tons of fun all around. For the most part, though, the "suit of armor" was trying to impersonate a real knight, even though there was no one inside.

 

[Nebulous]

Exactly, superhuman isn't what I'm shooting for. In BX it wasn't super human at all; magic-users can't cast spells when engaged in melee and can only cast a few a day. The character played like a normal knight who was good at kick boxing. A little, strange, but fine. Especially because it was jointly controlled by 3 characters.

It was also fun when the different body parts would split up. Sometimes, the legs went one way, the arms bought a wheelchair and rolled himself around, and the dwarf wore the helmet. Tons of fun all around. For the most part, though, the "suit of armor" was trying to impersonate a real knight, even though there was no one inside.

Ah. I have to admit it's an interesting roleplaying experiment. 5e heroes are way, way more powered up than BX. The spellcasters don't get tons of slots but they always have cantrips that will never run out, like firebolt. I would suggest do not use Feats, that will only complicate things.

But even if they had one action each, the armor could cast a spell, swing a sword and move. You would need to experiment some, for example, if one of the three parts didn't act, that would give the legs two actions to Dash (run). If the body doesn't swing a sword one round, the head can cast a spell more powerful than a 0-level cantrip.

That's kind of cool they can break up.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

Ah. I have to admit it's an interesting roleplaying experiment. 5e heroes are way, way more powered up than BX. The spellcasters don't get tons of slots but they always have cantrips that will never run out, like firebolt. I would suggest do not use Feats, that will only complicate things.

But even if they had one action each, the armor could cast a spell, swing a sword and move. You would need to experiment some, for example, if one of the three parts didn't act, that would give the legs two actions to Dash (run). If the body doesn't swing a sword one round, the head can cast a spell more powerful than a 0-level cantrip.

That's kind of cool they can break up.

Yeah. That's why I'm trying to ask for opinions. I'm not really sure what to do with the character yet.

We've had a lot of strange characters, though. We had one character that was a house and another who was a magic sword. We also had a character with MPD, who would change personalities, INT, WIS, CHA, and class every time someone at the table rolled a 6 (on any die).

 

[Nebulous]

I don't think class matters as much as how you break up the action economy. If you want the armor to kick, swing a sword and cast a cantrip all in one round, you might want to consider giving them a penalty for stacking all those attacks. Or just make the kick very minor, not a ninja roundhouse.

 

[dave2008]

You could try this product on the DMsGuild: Golemancy It mentions a voltron like option in the description that allows characters to each control part of the golem. I think adapting that might work. I feel like have seen something similar on UA reddit too.