Search results

when you look at damage, do you also take survivability into account? This game has dismal healer options, so individual player resilience is important. Barbarians don't do a ton of damage, but they are hard to kill. If all you are looking for is damage, then play a high damage class and build...

POINTS!!!

I am not sure if anybody noticed, but rogues actually have the highest non-magical damage potential

I should have mentioned, my idea removes "shield" as an item and replaces it with actual shields. The reason I give such high AC is that it makes the damage trade-off easier to stomach. As usual, it is the DMs responsibility to control when his players have access to equipment.

this is a problem that stems from two issues. The first one is ambiguity in the RAW, the second one is lack of defensive gear. The first problem is easily addressed by active DMs who make sounds judgement calls where the rules are unclear. the second problem is easily fixed by adding new shields...

do you realize this steps all over the savage attacker feat

I have been reading the replies, and i fell i should mention, i started my players out completely naked in an unknown land. one of them was smart enough to fashion a crude weapon out of a piece of scrap wood. needless to say, two goblins against four naked players was an interesting first...

I have recently started a new game with my friends. They are relatively new players and i am still a relatively new DM. My experience as a player has taught me that one of the most discouraging things that can happen is to lose a character that you put a lot of thought and time into creating...

after reading the ranger entry in the PHB, i have one thing to add to your list of improvements. i think the beast master archetype should allow access to better beasts at higher levels. With this in mind, i suggest allowing the following change to ranger's companion. At level 12, the...

The original post is good. we have seen in my home game that even a bard can be a better ranger than a ranger. these changes seem well thought out and i would definitely allow them

I would definitely avoid giving any class advantage as a passive ability, especially at low levels. when you mofify a class, you should take multiclassing into account. if you get advantage as a passive and then multiclass as a rogue, you will drastically increase the amount of damage a rogue...

I actually have a shadow monk I was planning on taking rogue at lvl 6. I hadn't even noticed how well stunning strike goes with rogue skills. Thank you

Monk is a very fun and versatile class. The issue I have with ignoring RAW for combat is that it takes away from the role play aspect. If I make a character who can kill everything, then I have no need to find more creative solutions. It is the DMs decision how to run the game, but don't let...

In dnd terms, you are referring to a werebear. There is a lot of info in the DMG and the MM on this subject. I would not be opposed to working that scenario into my campaign if a player expressed an interest in becoming a werecreature.

I do agree that druid multiclasses make great fodder for npc tribes if you limit the forms they can use. For instance, druid barbarian might be referred to as a Bear Sark. This would be an interesting way to play it. But I feel you would have to have a story that justifies it.

I am sorry for starting to kung fu panda thing in my own thread. Lesson learned. Let's move on

Bear dex is 10, so I omitted it since it would add nothing

He actually wouldn't lose it since he wouldn't be wearing any armor. Assuming a WIS of 20, it would go up to 15

Kung Fu panda... ;)

Ok, here were my thoughts, and what I ultimately told my player. 1. RAW were not intended to be used to justify stretching unrelated rules. So you cannot use the wording of alter self to do things outside of that spell. 2. If you want to do it, I will let you under one condition. If you...