D&D 5E Help playtest my fantasy stat draft!

akr71

Hero
I think it works. We do have a preponderance towards melee, including the Wizard with Armor of Agythys and Gauntlets of Ogre Strength. Actually, we have two characters with AoA. Add in a PAM paladin and the Moon Druid with the Flametongue Scimitar for when not in beast form and we're very in-their-face.
Hollywood is a team player and would definitely prepare mostly healing & control spells for use when not in beast form. I felt he needed the ASI, but I did contemplate taking a couple levels in wizard. His Con is OK, but War Caster would be next on the list of needs.

If we can't peer-pressure or guilt trip @TwoSix into running a one shot for us, Hollywood is definitely now on my list of campaign NPCs :ROFLMAO:
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
Hollywood is a team player and would definitely prepare mostly healing & control spells for use when not in beast form. I felt he needed the ASI, but I did contemplate taking a couple levels in wizard. His Con is OK, but War Caster would be next on the list of needs.

I should add if wasn't completely apparent that Doc is all about the range (Pistol). That, plus the skill-monkey.

It was really, really hard for me to build the pistol concept adequately. I've been noodling with it since I saw the Tasha's gunner feat, and there just isn't adequate support (outside of Mercer's stuff). Originally I was going to go Warlock 3/Rogue 1, and have a pact of the blade and invocation to make the pistol more ghostly/summonable ...

But I really like the Phantom rogue subclass. That's an underused gem, IMO.
 

TwoSix

Unserious gamer
I should add if wasn't completely apparent that Doc is all about the range (Pistol). That, plus the skill-monkey.

It was really, really hard for me to build the pistol concept adequately. I've been noodling with it since I saw the Tasha's gunner feat, and there just isn't adequate support (outside of Mercer's stuff). Originally I was going to go Warlock 3/Rogue 1, and have a pact of the blade and invocation to make the pistol more ghostly/summonable ...

But I really like the Phantom rogue subclass. That's an underused gem, IMO.
My only real caveat with Phantom Rogue is that the 9th level feature is really cool and should have been the 3rd level feature, IMO. But I have that issue with several Rogue subclasses, they don't get the real fun stuff until way too late in level progression.

And yea, gun stuff is difficult to pull off in official 5e, you need some good homebrew support for it.
 

Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
My only real caveat with Phantom Rogue is that the 9th level feature is really cool and should have been the 3rd level feature, IMO. But I have that issue with several Rogue subclasses, they don't get the real fun stuff until way too late in level progression.

OMG. The 9th level is absolutely amazing and flavorful!

But , in fairness, the 3rd level abilities, especially Whispers of the Dead (get to choose any skill/tool proficiency every short rest) is both flavorful and useful if you're doing a skill monkey, and Wails from the Grave is always fun for doing some extra damage- I think it's actually more interesting when you have a ranged sneak attack (as in this case).

But yeah, I can see that. It's definitely an example of a subclass that keeps getting better and better as you increase levels.
 



el-remmen

Moderator Emeritus
This thread has turned into evidence for why I keep a tight rein on what I allow in my games, because I have no friggin' idea what most of you are talking about and don't have much enthusiasm about doing the reading I'd need to do to get it. :p:LOL:

I wonder if this is in part because because I only started with 5E in very late 2019 - and thus the core rules still provide enough new stuff for me. I literally read the rogue class for the first time last week (no one in my groups have played one) and I have no idea how warlock powers work (I banned them for now from my current games because I did not want to deal with a third way of dealing with spells and am playing with mostly newbies who look to me to explain stuff).
 

Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
This thread has turned into evidence for why I keep a tight rein on what I allow in my games, because I have no friggin' idea what most of you are talking about and don't have much enthusiasm about doing the reading I'd need to do to get it. :p:LOL:

I wonder if this is in part because because I only started with 5E in very late 2019 - and thus the core rules still provide enough new stuff for me. I literally read the rogue class for the first time last week (no one in my groups have played one) and I have no idea how warlock powers work (I banned them for now from my current games because I did not want to deal with a third way of dealing with spells and am playing with mostly newbies who look to me to explain stuff).

If it makes you feel better, I started that way! No feats, no multiclassing, etc.

After I loosened the grips a little, I realized the following-

1. Feats are fine. The table banned a few (PAM, GWM, SS, CX) just because they were too appealing, but most of them are nice flavor and aren't overpowering or must-haves.

2. MCing, if anything, usually makes you weaker- it's mostly for flavor.

3. All the new subclasses don't do a whole lot. Most of the power is in the base chassis.

4. The Warlock is probably the coolest spellcaster, and once you read it and get it, the most fun. Unfortunately, almost everyone will default to a PEW PEW PEW eldritch blast spammer.
 

Fenris-77

Small God of the Dozens
Supporter
I also tend to keep a tight rein on bloat when both I and my players are new to a system. What worse is if I'm new, and most of the players are as well, but with a couple of veteran players thrown in. Blargh. I prefer to have a tidy set of things I need to know when I'm finding my feet in a new system with a lot of available content.
 


Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
Eldritch Blast, while mechanically solid, plays no part in why I love the Warlock class so much.

BINGO! The class and mechanics are awesome. Really, it's one of my favorites ... if not my favorite, certainly at the top.

They do set it up so EB is incredibly attractive, and either you go "all-in" with it (and invocations) or you don't.
 

Fenris-77

Small God of the Dozens
Supporter
BINGO! The class and mechanics are awesome. Really, it's one of my favorites ... if not my favorite, certainly at the top.

They do set it up so EB is incredibly attractive, and either you go "all-in" with it (and invocations) or you don't.
That's about where I'm at. If you go Eldritch Blast heavy you don't have room to do much else in terms of invocations. I find EB spam a boring as dirt character to play, so I don't go that route. Mask of Many Faces might be my favorite low level invocation.
 

el-remmen

Moderator Emeritus
1. Feats are fine. The table banned a few (PAM, GWM, SS, CX) just because they were too appealing, but most of them are nice flavor and aren't overpowering or must-haves.

2. MCing, if anything, usually makes you weaker- it's mostly for flavor.

Oh, I allowed both of these right away! :LOL:

D&D without multiclassing is like brie without a nice slice of pear.


funny face dancing GIF
 

Fenris-77

Small God of the Dozens
Supporter
I allowed MCing right away because it's often integral to how I build D&D characters generally. I start with a concept separate from class or mechanics and then I try to figure out how to best realize the concept, and I often end up MCing to get the right mix of mechanics and rules in place for that initial concept. I don't really care about 'classes' as separate things per se outside of the mechanics that accompany them.
 


TwoSix

Unserious gamer
This thread has turned into evidence for why I keep a tight rein on what I allow in my games, because I have no friggin' idea what most of you are talking about and don't have much enthusiasm about doing the reading I'd need to do to get it. :p:LOL:

I wonder if this is in part because because I only started with 5E in very late 2019 - and thus the core rules still provide enough new stuff for me. I literally read the rogue class for the first time last week (no one in my groups have played one) and I have no idea how warlock powers work (I banned them for now from my current games because I did not want to deal with a third way of dealing with spells and am playing with mostly newbies who look to me to explain stuff).
Totally fair, but I'm definitely in the opposite boat. I've been playing 5e steadily with multiple groups since 2014, and most of our games are relatively short (about 9-18 months), so I've played or seen played pretty much everything in the PHB, and a good portion of the stuff in Xanathar's and Tasha's at this point. I'm also just a rules sponge and our resident rules expert, so just seeing stuff in a play for a few sessions generally makes me feel I've got a good grasp of what it does.

It's why I'm so pro-homebrew and have a large list of allowed material I've carefully curated; I just need that dopamine hit of seeing novel material in play. I had mentioned gamer motivations in one of the other currently moving threads, my #1 motivation for any kind of game is embracing and mastering complex rules.
 

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
I should add if wasn't completely apparent that Doc is all about the range (Pistol). That, plus the skill-monkey.

It was really, really hard for me to build the pistol concept adequately. I've been noodling with it since I saw the Tasha's gunner feat, and there just isn't adequate support (outside of Mercer's stuff). Originally I was going to go Warlock 3/Rogue 1, and have a pact of the blade and invocation to make the pistol more ghostly/summonable ...

But I really like the Phantom rogue subclass. That's an underused gem, IMO.
Ah, between hexblade and taking Armor of Agathys I had assumed you were melee. I should have known.
 



Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top