Search results

Is it required to be?

Because the principles behind Arcane magic are fairly well known scientifically, and predictable. The principles behind Divine magic (if indeed there are any) are not.

That is why I was very careful to keep my telekinesis example to movement of matter. Transformation of matter, imbuing of matter with independent sentience, and creation of magical force are all fairly overtly magical effects and not telekinetic ones.

You just did: some of the deities in Eberron are not specified as polytheistic "gods". Because it sounds about right, while being conceptually completely incorrect.

Example (This was designed for a slightly different concept, so there may be some adjustment needed.) Telekinesis discipline Spells gained: 0: Mage hand, Blade Ward. 1: Catapult, Feather Fall. 2: Levitate, Maximilian’s Earthen Grasp. 3: Fly, Conjure Barrage. 4: Resilient sphere, Freedom of...

There are philosophies, spirits, or supernatural forces suggested as potential deities for cleric right there in the PHB. Xanathar's clarified this, but it has always been a possibility in 5e.

Haste spell and a bonus action attack (GWM crit, PM buttstroke etc) would take it to 10 I think.

I have already given my thoughts on the Ranger. As the quote that my post is a response to says, that post was about an "animal companion class" side project.

I would remove the "animal" flavour of the class and make it a purely mechanical companion class. Then you would have subclasses where the flavour resides, whether that is companion animal, artificial construct, ancestral or Nature spirit, animated dead, faithful mount, extradimensional monster...

Magic, Monster-hunting, and Environmental Adaptation. To me, those are what distinguish the Ranger from just a wilderness Rogue or Fighter.

Can't be Liefield: You can see their feet.

Indeed. The mechanics of Eldritch Balst and Agonising blast really limit Warlock design. Ranged rogues can get reasonably close to this: generally a bit below or above depending on the level since rogue damage goes up more smoothly. The steps are: 1) Have a decent Dex. - As with the Warlock...

False. I don't always start games at first level, particularly for one-shots. Even otherwise however, a first level Wizard or Cleric for example is unusual and capable of feats that the majority of people in the setting cannot match. Thus I would consider even starting at 1st level to be more...

It is the internet, but the internet is made up of real people and being on the internet does not excuse or cause them to act against their nature. The thread is on the internet, but everyone in it had a choice as to whether to engage with the OP as written, or to sidetrack it quibbling about...

Really? I thought a very mildly optimised rogue can stay within a few DPR of a warlock who isn't trying too hard.

Speaking of pantsless, I do get a very Vanaa vibe.

Oh my. :hmm: I knew your players were unpleasant. But to spark a response like this over the thought of playing a class in a less-than-hyperoptimised manner? Tell me, how do they feel about . . . Monks? :heh:

No more than characters dying a lot means removing them from the game. Generally a lot of threads specify character death, not loss. Personally I've seen more characters die in Cyclopedia games than 5e games, but actually losing a character in those games is very rare due to many more...

That is what point-buy is for. You can generate a character with minimum of 10 in every stat easily.

If you think that ,for example, wizards should be able to get expertise in Insight without taking a feat, giving every class a free expertise is not an unreasonable houserule.