D&D General Vanity Frankenstein 5E: My homebrew D&D project [+]

[TwoSix]

Hmmm.

I thought the word "grasp" suggested. . . well, grasping, holding onto and squeezing tight for a moment and thus the damage. The holding onto can thus be modified to pulling, pushing, etc by an invocation. Not sure I see the muddle you mention in this description, but I will think on it more. I definitely don't want to confuse players.

"Grasp" certainly carries that meaning. But I would say calling it a "beam" works slightly against it, as does the attack mechanic. Generally if it's emanating from the caster and being aimed at the target, I would see that as an attack roll; if it's creating an effect AT the target, that would generally be a save. Contrast scorching ray with fireball as the classic example. Or produce flame versus sacred flame.

Now, if you're envisioning the spell as firing a flexible beam that is aimed at the target and then wraps around them, maybe a rename to "eldritch chain"?

 

[el-remmen]

Now, if you're envisioning the spell as firing a flexible beam that is aimed at the target and then wraps around them, maybe a rename to "eldritch chain"?

Yes! That is how I envision it (though the beam is invisible) - but not sure "chain" is the right word. I went with "Force" because 1. I don't like the word "blast," 2. It does force damage, and 3. It sounds generic enough that the modifications via eldritch invocations made sense in my mind, the invocations modify how you use this generic telekinetic force.

But you've given me something to think about - gonna see how others (including my players) respond to it, to see if it matters either because it is not evocative enough or because it is actually confusing as to what it does.

 

[el-remmen]

Here is an organizational question:

While the laying out the class documents, I find myself torn on how to list subclasses. Obviously, the most direct route and the way that emulates the PHB is to list them alphabetically (thus for Rogues, it'd be Arcane Trickster, Swashbucker, Thief), but there is a not small part of me that wants to list them in order of difficulty to make/play, so in the Rogue example, I might list them as Thief, Swashbuckler, Arcane Trickster.

Thoughts?

 

[TwoSix]

Here is an organizational question:

While the laying out the class documents, I find myself torn on how to list subclasses. Obviously, the most direct route and the way that emulates the PHB is to list them alphabetically (thus for Rogues, it'd be Arcane Trickster, Swashbucker, Thief), but there is a not small part of me that wants to list them in order of difficulty to make/play, so in the Rogue example, I might list them as Thief, Swashbuckler, Arcane Trickster.

Thoughts?

Least complex to most complex makes my brain feel better.

Although bonus points if you can make all your simple subclasses start with 'A'.

 

[el-remmen]

Although bonus points if you can make all your simple subclasses start with 'A'.

"Uh, this looks like the Champion subclass, but it is called the Aardvarkarator, for some reason?"

 

[Baron Opal II]

Here is an organizational question: ...

Listing them in increasing complexity makes sense to me, too.

 

[el-remmen]

TFW you realize you wrote nothing about how mages and their subclasses prepare spells (or don’t).

The good thing about sharing is that even if you get no useful feedback (and I definitely already have) just posting it for other people helps you to see what’s missing or contradictory.

 

[el-remmen]

The source I was working with last night while tweaking the wizard subclass.

 

[el-remmen]

I added the Mage class + 2 subclasses PDF to the post with the Mage Class table. I will be posting a backgrounds PDF soon, too.

 

[el-remmen]

When it comes to backgrounds, I eschewed the 2024 idea of ASIs and background feats (humans are the only species to get a starting feat). I am not a fan of ASIs and limited them only to levels 4 and 8 (where you choose either a feat or an ASI and no feat grants an ASI).

Furthermore, I tried to specify some of the vagaries of the 2014 backgrounds, added specific references to the backgrounds as they exist in the setting and got rid of all the ideals and bonds crap.

I will admit that not all backgrounds are created equal, but I tend to play with folks who choose backgrounds for the flavor, not the abilities.

Anyway, here is a PDF of them.