• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

D&D 5E Character Concepts you cannot make in 5E

When I read pemerton's play reports and I see a spellcaster use a spell to affect creatures through a mirror, I think "no way the Fighter has stuff like that." At best, he's used Come and Get It on some water, but that's about the only instance I can think of off-hand.
You're forgetting his key role in reforging Whelm into Overwhelm by shoving his hands into the forge to hold it steady for the dwarven artificers! (Hard level 16 Endurance check, from memory)

A bit more seriously, I think the relationship between the battle grid and the use of Athletics during tactical movement resolution is actually one of the bigger problems for fighter versatility. If movement in combat was "theatre of the mind", then a good Athletics bonus would be a much more flexible resource in the hands of fighter players. Whereas at present, in order to keep it balanced with the rest of the movement mechanics, all it gives you is a rather inferior substitute for flying over pits.

In a recent session, the PCs wiped out Torog's Soul Abattoir. The bulk of this was a skill challenge:

* The Soul Abattoir (located in the Shadowdark) consisted of a series of buildings located in an icy, Vault-of-the-Drow-style Underdark cavern, into which souls "flowed" in a fashion analogous to rivers;

* The entrance to the Soul Abattoir, at which the PCs had arrived, was an icy tunnel floor, ending at a cliff overlooking the cavern - the river of souls was flowing some way beneath the ice, and flowed out from the base of the entrance cliff into Torog's various machines;

* The drow sorcerer and tiefling paladin flew to the bottom of the cliff, where the paladin blew his Fire Horn to render the ice more susceptible to heat, the drow cast Flame Spiral to melt some of the ice, and then cast Wall of Water to block the flow of souls (check-wise, this was an Arcana check by the player of the drow, with a buff from the melting of the ice and use of the wall);

* The paladin and invoker then headed to the largest building, at the other end of the cavern, while the cleric-ranger on his flying carpet provided archery cover and the sorcerer flew above them maintaining concentration on his wall spell (check-wise, this was an Acro check for the archer and the sorcerer, and an Intimidate check from the paladin assisted by the invoker to make their way through Torog's minions);

* Once they got to the far building, the paladin and invoker sought the intervention of the Raven Queen to redirect the flow of souls directly to the Shadowfell rather than via Torog's infernal machines (one failed and one successful Religion check);

* Meanwhile, with the flow of souls stopped, the fighter fought his way through the other (lesser) buildings, destroying the machinery inside them (Athletic check buffed by expenditure of a close burst encounter power to fight through the minions from building to building, and Dungeoneering to wreck the machinery);

* When the PCs has all regrouped at the furthest (and most important) building resolution then switched from skill challenge mode to tactical combat mode, as they stormed the building and fought with Torog's shrivers plus a death titan;

* After the (very challenging) fight, during which the last machine was turned off by the sorcerer (the player made a successful Thievery check as a standard action once the PCs had finally fought their way along the central gantry that ran above the pool of souls), the skill challenge then resumed as the Soul Abattoir itself started to collapse;

* The ranger and sorcerer flew out of the cavern (successful Acro checks) while the paladin ran out beneath them, but was struck by falling rocks (failed Aths check, making the 3-person group check a success altogether as a majority succeeded, but costing the paladin damage for the failure);

* The fighter shielded the invoker (Endurance check) as the latter held off the powerful soul energy while the others made their escape (Religion check);

* The invoker noticed that Vecna was trying to take control of the soul energy via the invoker's imp familiar that has the Eye of Vecna implanted in it (Insight check; fuller discussion of this apparently controversial event can be found here);

* The invoker made sure that the Raven Queen and not Vecna got the souls (decision on the basis of the earlier Religion check with no further check required; there may have been some damage taken from this decision, and Vecna in anger shut down the offending imp via his Eye);

* The invoker and fighter then ran out of the collapsing cavern behind their companions (Athletics checks, with the fighter doing well enough to grant an "aid another" bonus to the invoker, so from memory neither took any damage).​

I don't know how much that counts as an example of a fighter's versatility, but I've posted it to try and show how a fighter's skills and class abilities can be used to support a more open-ended approach to action resolution once you start adjudicating things in a more "free-descriptor" style, as in a skill challenge. Different people might read the above report differently, and different participants in the actual play experience might see it differently too, but my own view is that the invoker was probably more central than the fighter, but the fighter no less central than the sorcerer. And in combat the fighter in question is definitely more central than the invoker - the invoker is as close to a skill-based, non-combat PC as you can get in 4e (eg two or three skill training feats, skill focus, linguistics, book imp familiar, lots of rituals and ritual use, etc).

In combat, though, the mechanics for the Athletics skill, and the general lack of relevance of the Endurance skill, tie the fighter rather tightly to the tactical movement mechanics.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

What are some character concepts you cannot make in 5E that you could in previous editions. Please explain why you cannot make them also.

For me I find it hard to make a light armor, heavy weapon fighter with any penchant for skills or socialization. This is due to having to put your highest stats in Dex to make up for the AC loss, thus making you a very low damage heavy weapon user. Then you also cannot use non Dex based skills with any hope of being successful for any but the easiest checks.

For the life of me I can't figure out how to make a defender Wizard either. Their extremely low hp and low AC make it difficult. If you were to take the Dwarf and armor feat then you would have the AC, but then you still wouldn't have the hp. The only hope is to spam defensive spells and then you low out in effectiveness as anything but a damage soaker.


For the lightly armored fighter, I'd consider dipping into the monk class so you could add WIS to AC. My character from the previous Encounters season was a rogue/monk; I had a pretty respectable AC. Also, since WIS was one of my primary abilities, I was actually fairly good at some non-physical skills.

I'm actually pretty happy with there not currently being a melee style for wizards; it would be nice if this edition allowed Fighters to actually be good at their primary role without needing to worry about other classes infringing upon their niche. That being said, I see no reason why this concept is not covered by multiclassing.

---------------------------------------------------------

Things I don't feel like I can make...

an awakened penguin ninja (one of my old 3.5 characters)

a 5E style sorcerer like WoTC showcased a few packets back... hopefully that concept survives; I thought it was cool

a warlord

goblin characters

a monk focused on grappling (I don't even know if grappling is possible in 5E yet...? It might very well be, but I don't remember reading rules for it.)




Those are the ones which immediately came to mind.
 

When you realize you are paying WotC for nothing (because the rules are not the game) maybe you'll wake up and stop buying D&D products.

Until then the mechanics are the game, because everything else can be had without buying a single D&D product.

In my view, the rules are helpful for the game, but the rules are not the game. Your character concept is not the rules. Your interaction in the game is not the rules. The rules help adjudicate things you do, but they are not the things you do. I am free to make any character concept I want. The DM will work with me as best they can. Sometimes I will gain some advantage from the character concept by means of the rules, sometimes not, but I will be able to play any character concept I want, and have fun with it, regardless of whether the rules have outlined some preplanned conception of that character concept.

For me, it's not useful to be stuck on the rules, and competing to find ways to use the rules to gain advantage. I'm genuinely saying I find it's more enjoyable, with any version of the game, if I take a step back from the rules and not focus on them much. Most of them are not even there for the player, as most rules are there for the DM to help them adjudicate things. I find the game plays best if I think of it as not a competition - I'm not vying against my fellow players or the DM for supremacy of the rules or the game. I just play my character concept and have fun with it, and I don't focus on what's written on my character sheet or in a book (I use those things sometimes, I just don't focus on them). I really have more fun with it when I view it this way.
 
Last edited:

In what edition can you make a Fighter that is lightly armored, uses heavy weapons, and has social skills while still being as effective a Fighter as a more standard version?

In what edition can you do the same for a defender wizard?

I'm not sold on 5e at all.

And I love 4e.

But you are reaching, and making us 4e grognards look bad in the process.
 

The closest thing I've found to this concept is 4e's battlerager fighter, which gets a boost from light armor and can keep gaining temp hp (tho I believe errata stopped it stacking). This is basically how to make a non-dextrous light armored fighter work - give 'em the ability to bleed more than anyone else. A decent battlerager subclass - or whatever they call it in 5e - would walk around with a thick layer of hemoglobin shielding most of the time. It could even get a big bonus for hitting for more damage than it has hit points. Intriguing...
 




4e midwifed the arrival of edition wurst. Boerewors vs the new bologna.

Fortunately, we've learnt how to accommodate more types of sausage under the big tent, since then.
 

What are some character concepts you cannot make in 5E that you could in previous editions. Please explain why you cannot make them also.

For me I find it hard to make a light armor, heavy weapon fighter with any penchant for skills or socialization. This is due to having to put your highest stats in Dex to make up for the AC loss, thus making you a very low damage heavy weapon user. Then you also cannot use non Dex based skills with any hope of being successful for any but the easiest checks.

For the life of me I can't figure out how to make a defender Wizard either. Their extremely low hp and low AC make it difficult. If you were to take the Dwarf and armor feat then you would have the AC, but then you still wouldn't have the hp. The only hope is to spam defensive spells and then you low out in effectiveness as anything but a damage soaker.

Looking at your first character, you want it to have the advantage of light armor (more maneuverable) and be better at social skills than a regular fighter. You don't get something for nothing though, so you will have to make some sacrifices. Either less damage or worse AC. The point buy system makes it really expensive to max out a stat, so you don't lose that much str for a higher dex. I haven't done the numbers for 5e, but in 4e you could either go with a 20/15 split, or a 18/18 split. In other words, trading -1 to hit/dmg for +2AC, ranged attacks, initiative, reflex defense and so on. Since you are giving up heavy armor for light, you will end up a few points lower in AC (not up as directly derived from the stats).

I don't think there was a single high hp wizard in earlier editions. You had the Sword mage from 4e, but it's not really a wizard. In 5e, you would probably need to multiclass fighter/wizard which I assume have some sub-optimal levels until they start to shine, much like it was in 3e.

There will probably be quite good support of non-core classes after launch (probably way too much in my opinion), where you get more options. Until then, you can either just make a character that's not "optimal", or you can talk with your DM and come up with a feat or class feature that makes your character "optimal".
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top