Search results

See, I know other people feel this way, but I've never really understood why. Like, if there's any feat at all that's actually relevant for my character concept, getting that as soon as possible is always going to outweigh going from 16 to 18 or 18 to 20, because missing that aspect of my...

The funny thing about point buy is that, for players who only need/want certain stats to be good, the lower total arrays are better than the higher total arrays. For instance, I'd almost never pick the 75-point (13, 13, 13, 12, 12, 12) over the 71-point (15, 15, 13, 10, 10, 8).

If I wanted to compete: 1. Bard, Paladin, Sorcerer, Warlock are my core classes. Each class would be given a choice of main progression (expert, fullcaster, halfcaster, martial, etc.) and sub progression (subclasses). 2. Initial species would consist of popular phytanthropes and theriantropes...

Not defending the video (because I hate it more than most people), but the Warlock high level spell thing is only pedantically incorrect. Yes, Warlocks have access to spells of 6th level and above via Mystic Arcanum. But Mystic Arcanum is absolutely not what a normal person would think of when...

That and maintaining the barriers that make entering/exiting the region nearly impossible.

The stats given for Auril are not valid as a comparison point, given the circumstances within the book those stats are listed in.

They aren't asking to use an existing ongoing spell with War Caster, they're asking if they can change the target of a spell after its initial casting if said casting was via War Caster. The answer to which is a solid no. AoEs are fine if you can choose who or what is affected in the AoE.

Is there any evidence that reasonably maintained real world weapons broke or wore away to uselessness quickly enough that implementing time/usage based weapon breaking rules even makes sense? Because initial searches are coming up with weapon 'lifespans' of a couple of years or more, which...

I'm under the impression that the bolded would let you change the stat used for the spells gained, because otherwise it's a defunct part of the feat.

If I recall correctly, the only way to do what I think you're looking for is to snag Pact of the Tome via the Eldritch Adept feat.

According to the OP, a Staff of Fire was being used for both castings, so no spell slots are being used.

So... What's the supposed workaround doing in this case?

Does the Patreon content include the stuff he can't sell? Because if not...

The vast majority of the actual first party books (core and otherwise) functionally don't exist for most players (and DMs) given how few people actually read them, so it's really hard to be sympathetic here.

The cleric does not want to start PVP with the necromancer.

From the spell itself: And so: 3rd level slot: Animate 1 Skeleton (2 with Undead Thralls) or Maintain control over 4 4th level slot: Animate 3 Skeletons (4 with Undead Thralls) or Maintain control over 6 5th level slot: Animate 5 Skeletons (6 with Undead Thralls) or Maintain control over 8...

If the below doesn't work, they clearly aren't the correct party. Thus, I'd find a more amenable group.

Not sure who started the 18 skeleton thing. Multiples of 4 (8, 12, 16) are better. Anyway, having 18 Skeletons RAW isn't as difficult as you described. You really only need to be a 7th level Necromancer if you're willing to work more than a day on it, 8th if you can wait a short rest, or 9th...

If my skeleton squad makes me so unbalanced that the rest of the party is irrelevant, then I'm clearly slumming around. Normally, I'd take that opportunity to manage the less interesting but necessary stuff so that they can handle what most interests them with a sort of safety net.

Have not gotten up to date with the thread, but I am a necromancer player thoroughly disgusted with the proposed changes to the Necromancy subclass that absolutely wants the ability to control 16 skeletons a turn entailing everything said skeletons might do.