D&D General Requesting permission to have something cool

[Reynard]

It's personal when you make inferences about people to make a point. Especially when those inferences are readily and demonstrably untrue and get a railroad going that other people hop onto to try to get their own curious licks in with.

Don't blame me for what other posters do.

That said, I have a great solution for both of us.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

As someone who has sought such a thing, I can at least give my personal experience:

Every single 5e DM I have ever asked for homebrew content has said no, unless they were already a close personal friend.

Literally 100% of 5e DMs I've asked, with one friend of mine as the only exception. Most of them complimented me on my design; most of them said that they thought it would probably work out alright, or didn't comment at all. All of them were quite polite about it.

Over a year of applying for 5e games, and none of them accepted.

As a 5e DM, it's truly just simpler for me to give the players options in the form of "books we're going to use in this campaign." That could include WotC official publications and/or 3PP books, depending on the campaign. IMO, there's plenty of PC concepts that can be achieved without the need for homebrew. Also, I'm guessing more than one of the DMs who refused your homebrew had been burnt in the past by a player, whom they did not know previously, creating some homebrew exploit that became un-fun for one or more people at the table. It's easier to say "no" than risk that again. (Note: I'm not saying you are/were trying to create a homebrew exploit, just that there are people out there who will do it, given the chance.)

 

[Micah Sweet]

And I said if it was so easy to print out a PDF and give it to a DM, this and other thread would not exist.

If the material exists and most DMs allow it, why does this thread exist?

It is that easy. I do it (from both sides) all the time. I'm sorry it hasn't worked out that way for you.

This thread exists (for some) because there is an unhealthy belief among some gamers that only WotC can solve their problems, and since that seems very unlikely, said folks are perennially disappointed.

 

[Scribe]

If the material exists and most DMs allow it, why does this thread exist?

Any number of reasons from charitable to not.

1 is: To change hearts and minds.

 

[Remathilis]

-you don't need to fly when you can launch arrows to perforate the dragon's wings to bring it down or daze it with a throwing hammer to the face,

So a stunning strike or trip attack done at range that doesn't have a size limit.

-you don't need to fly when you can throw your grapple rope around it's horn and literally drag the beast back to the ground with pure muscle,

An attack roll with a grappling hook and a grapple check

-you don't need to fly when you can climb up the side of the mountain and leap off to grab it's tail and climb onto it's back,

Assuming there is already a mountain nearby, this is a jump check with maybe athletics or a grapple roll to hold on.

-you don't need to fly if you can anger it enough that it wants to come attack you close up on the ground

Goading attack at range. Of course, the dragon will still prefer to breath fire at a safe distance because we're not doing martial mind control.

---

Of course, I AM assuming you don't expect to have these things automatically happen. You don't expect that the fighter conjures up a mountain to jump off because he has the "jump off mountain" power on his sheet. He doesn't get a free crippling strike that makes the dragon's wing permanently ruined, because that will suck when the dragon uses his crippling attack to ruin the fighter's sword arm. That the fighter and dragon get into a grapple and not that the fighter gets an auto win because he used the grappling hook attack.

Because I would hate to think you're just casting nonmagical versions of hold person, Bigby's hand, jump, and compel duel. Right?

 

[MuhVerisimilitude]

I actually don't really see how this thread's title is related to the OP, which is what I've been responding to.

The title was a mistake which I should have fixed before posting. The title doesn't focus on the intent of my post. I don't want to change it now because it would just create more confusion, and I don't even know if I can do it.

A better title would have focused on the main idea of the post: that things that you can get later on might change the feel of a class even before you actually get it.

 

[Corinnguard]

Oh. Then I can not let it slide and can see it as a purposefully mischaracterization. Good to know!

All I did was ask you a question. It was not my intent to mischaracterize you.

Because shockingly this is a forum discussing official D&D and I want to see official D&D do better instead of foisting their jobs on to everyone else all the time

Unfortunately as we all know, you can please some people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time. There will always be some element of D&D that won't satisfy a member of the D&D community. This is why some people turn towards a 3pp or a homebrew for a likely solution. 5e allows us to do this.

 

[Umbran]

I said they typically don't meet the barrier that most DMs place to accept 3pp.

Perhaps, but that is a people-problem, not a rules-problem.

 

[mamba]

It isn't a fighter subclass. It's a fighter rewrite.

why does that matter, if we do not like the current fighter and want a different one, why would a rewrite be a problem

 

[Raiztt]

Because shockingly this is a forum discussing official D&D and I want to see official D&D do better instead of foisting their jobs on to everyone else all the time.

This is an exercise in futility if you think anything written on this forum is going to impact the way WotC/Hasbro conducts their business.

The beloved 'oberani fallacy' isn't actually a fallacy - it's just a rejection of reality.