D&D 5E 20th level Sorcerer vs the world

[Zio_the_dark]

The Bastion level 14 friendly Challenge a party member for a Royal battle.
Who Will?
The Wizard?

How do you want to do that? Do you have a DM? VTT? Theatre of mind? Do you have a legal build for this?......

 

[Hohige]

How do you want to do that? Do you have a DM? VTT? Theatre of mind? Do you have a legal build for this?......

1v1. Choose your strongest PC player. get his sheet and the Bastion will defeat him without stealth.
I know, they cant Win.

 

[Zio_the_dark]

How do you want to do that? Do you have a DM? VTT? Theatre of mind? Do you have a legal build for this?......

1v1. Choose your strongest PC player. get his sheet and the Bastion will defeat him without stealth.

You see the problem? You don't answer questions...

 

[Hohige]

It's fun for you perhaps. Most people, though, don't want to share the table with a powergaming, overly literalist rules lawyer who's obsessed with their character being the star who only rolls up edgelord Sorcerers and also likes to bring a brigade of every possible pet into every battle.

I don't know if that's how you actually play, but that's very much the playstyle you seem to be consistently advocating throughout this endless thread.

Powergaming?
Single classed character, no Magical Item
Is It Powergaming?

 

[prabe]

View attachment 132420

I always win. Because I follow the rules.
If I came up with a strategy, it's because I thought of everything before, if It works or not.

Except you've lost, twice, against players who followed the rules.

You might want to rethink that statement. While you're thinking, you might want to look up the word "hubris."

 

[prabe]

BTW, the ruling you made (keeping the dice roll and removing the bonus that was no longer active) is compliant with Jeremy Crawford's ruling that you lose the bonus if you move outside of the range of the spell while he's active. From which we deduce that the bonus is lost when the spell is inactive... (in case anyone doubted that).

It's a logical ruling. It's nice to see Crawford gets some right.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

Powergaming?
Single classed character, no Magical Item
Is It Powergaming?

It's a pretty loose term, with the hallmark being placing mechanical optimization as the be-all-end-all of play. If you are fixated on the unbeatable mechanical awesomeness of your builds to the extent that you'll sustain a 2000+ post thread over trying to demonstrate how unbeatably awesome they are mechanically, you might be a bit of a powergamer.

 

[Istbor]

Wow you guys are really feeding the troll.

 

[Earth2Carnifex]

The Bastion level 14 friendly Challenge a party member for a Royal battle.
Who Will?
The Wizard?

The only way I would go near this is with a neutral DM agreed upon by both parties, in Roll20 and a whole lot of ground rules, starting with "All DM's rulings are final, any attempt to argue with the DM's ruling is grounds for immediate forfeiture.". Number two, "PC's come in cold, no pregame preping, no coffee BS, no bound celestial or ridiculous Sim's.". Number three "The battleground is a neutral space, determined by the DM and revealed to the players only at the beginning of the game.".

 

[prabe]

The only way I would go near this is with a neutral DM agreed upon by both parties, in Roll20 and a whole lot of ground rules, starting with "All DM's rulings are final, any attempt to argue with the DM's ruling is grounds for immediate forfeiture.". Number two, "PC's come in cold, no pregame preping, no coffee BS, no bound celestial or ridiculous Sim's.". Number three "The battleground is a neutral space, determined by the DM and revealed to the players only at the beginning of the game.".

I think you'd have to agree on a few runs, with different scenarios, and you'd at least need to be clear how much prep was involved. Maybe see how one of these sorcerer builds works if it can't set the terms of the battle.

You might, for fun, set up challenges that weren't one-on-one combat, too, to see who was better at out-of-combat stuff. It'd encourage less narrowly-focused builds, I suspect.

On the other hand, nope. Neither as a player nor as the DM. I don't expect the sorcerer to be particularly gracious either in victory or defeat--and I genuinely think either outcome is plausible--nor do I expect him to be happy to play by the actual rules, as opposed to what he wants/believes the rules to be.