Search results

Hi We are switching from 5E and I am planning to play a Univeral Wizard with Spell Blending with Flexible spellcasting Archetype. I am also planning to take Witch as an archetype for more spells. We are playing with the free archetype. I am trying to recreate the Order of the Scribes Wizard. I...

I agree that certain abilities/features should not be changed after a rest. Yesterday morning I was an expert bowman, but today I'm better at swordsmanship. Sorry, I should have explained it in previous discussion. It was grandfathered in. The Rogue's expertise originally allowed only expertise...

I think the intention was only exchange one, but at our table I we have changed more than 1. For game balance I don't think it would matter. What are your thoughts? Intentional. It will be changed to avoid confusion. Thank you

You could modify Blindness, Web, Sleep, and Fog Cloud potions to be set off when you trip a wire or step on a pressure plate.

I dabbled with expanding the herbalism kit to be able to "cast" spells like a Artificer, but could not think of any other "spells" and Path features to include. I was considering a Batman like archetype Beast Sense. If you spend 1 minute to imbibe one of your liquids, thereby expending its...

Added Homebrew to title. Thank you.

Exactly, if they are hunters, they should have a tool and skills to deal with traps, but different from Rogues. Hence Trapper's Kit.

A Ranger represents different things to different people: hunter, tracker, trapper, scout, naturalist, sub-class fighter, sub-class rogue, spell-less, spell caster, having a beast companion, etc. These, among others, are the reasons why trying to create a Ranger is difficult. The Ranger has...

385206

Beast Master 5 - 2 = 3 Fey Wanderer 7 Gloom Stalker 19 + 1 = 20 Horizon Walker 14 Hunter 22

I purchased the product and I must say the subclasses, especially for the Rogue, are overpowered. I was disappointed with this product

It was not the first language I was taught. However, not having the poster respond and clarify the intent while allowing the recipient to interpret the comment as something else is wrong. It gives credence to the recipient's interpretation.

That is not how I interpreted his comment.

Yes, I agree. But there are better ways of conveying that information

I should have said there are GMs who do not enforce, not all.

They do have access to more information. But when I see and read many alternative versions posted, it does show there are those who believe a revision is desired.

He was calling people who questioned were phantoms. By stating that if "someone has a problem might be a phantom in terms of general use," are you stating that if a person goes against what is considered the norm is nonexistent (phantom)? There are many ways to get a point across but one must...

Jeremy Crawford @JeremyECrawford Replying to @XXXXXXXX Alternate features for multiple classes are still a possibility, but we want to do more research before we invest time in them. We don’t want our design to chase phantoms but real desires held by a large number of players. 7:47 PM · Jul...

When someone refers to you as a phantom, wouldn't you get upset? It has nothing to do with not agreeing. Many people disagree, but to be dismissive of a person is another thing.

You can use what you like. Most important is to play what you and those at the table find enjoyable. It just would be nice, in our opinion, to have a ranger that is not looked at as an unwanted child.