D&D 5E Xanathar's Elven Accuracy

[Zardnaar]

#1. You can't have 2 feats and 18 dex under normal circumstances at level 6 with a non-human fighter. It would take level 8 to achieve. That doesn't really change the calculations though.

#2. I get higher numbers than yours when looking at the nova for the build you described.

Rolled stats don't count as normal? My halfling fighter managed a 20 at level 1. And then the DM got sick so retired at level 1.

If I roll stupidly good I normally pick a weaker option or something non standard. Halfling dual wielder champion

 

[Yunru]

#2. I get higher numbers than yours when looking at the nova for the build you described.

You would. It's pseudo-napkin maths so I didn't account for crits.

 

[Nikioko]

I have another idea for this feat:

Celestial Warlock (Half-Elf), Level 7.
STR 8, DEX 14, CON 16, INT 10, WIS 12, CHA 16.

On Level up, I don't take +2 on CHA, but Elven Accuracy and +1 on WIS.
Then I multiclass with Cleric.
That gives me proficiency with shield and medium armour, boosting my AC from 15 (Armour of Shadows) to 18 (Breastplate + Shield) and regaining one evocation.
Furthermore, I get triple advantage on Eldritch Blast (which is achieved by casting Greater Invisibility)
And since I get Cure Wounds and Healing Word as Cleric spells, I regain one Warlock spell known (as I don't need Cure Wounds twice) and can cast Cure Wounds on my 4th level Warlock spell slot anyway.

What do you think about that?

 

[transtemporal]

Of those builds I only would allow 1. at my table eventually 2. cannot analyse at the moment, the third is for my personal taste an absolute munchkin build.

Why did you specifically call out the 3rd option? Option 1 and 2 are just as cheesey. Or is cheese ok when its single class?

 

[Coroc]

[MENTION=6777693]transtemporal[/MENTION] #64

Cheese is never really ok at my table, and my personal preference is single class for a reason:

One of the Basics of fantasy rpg often overseen today is that you got a bunch of PCs who complement each other in their strengths and weaknesses

On Multiclass: If it is justified by RP it is more believable , if it occurs. Some class combos in my point of view are extremely contradictive and unbelievable e.g.

Paladin / rogue for moral and code of honor reasons, any Combo of fighter and other fighter types e.g. ranger/monk fighter/barbarian paladin/barbarian etc.
these only make sense if you want a cheesy power build. In some editions a fallen paladin reverts to fighter (in some Editions a fallen ranger also) but that is rather like losing some of your class powers than gaining something by multiclassing.

"Multiclassing" i liked was e.g. the basic editions elf class, you can easily emulate that class by elfs being eldritch knights.

That also applies to several other things which required multiclass before 5E:
E.G.
Take the criminal Background and you got basically a rogue multiclass for free.
So you got your choice of arcane trickster e.g. or wizard with criminal background.
And that is ok and sufficient, you do not need a thief wizard multiclass instead.
Your arcane trickster will backstab and hide .
Your criminal wizard is a bit better at casting and that's it.
He is still e.g. the groups best caster (fulfilling my balanced strengths and weaknesses theorem from above)
whereas being symmetric thief / mage he would be mediocre in both classes and lag behind single classes.

 

[transtemporal]

[MENTION=6777693]transtemporal[/MENTION] #64

Cheese is never really ok at my table, and my personal preference is single class for a reason:

One of the Basics of fantasy rpg often overseen today is that you got a bunch of PCs who complement each other in their strengths and weaknesses

On Multiclass: If it is justified by RP it is more believable , if it occurs. Some class combos in my point of view are extremely contradictive and unbelievable e.g.

Paladin / rogue for moral and code of honor reasons, any Combo of fighter and other fighter types e.g. ranger/monk fighter/barbarian paladin/barbarian etc.
these only make sense if you want a cheesy power build. In some editions a fallen paladin reverts to fighter (in some Editions a fallen ranger also) but that is rather like losing some of your class powers than gaining something by multiclassing.

"Multiclassing" i liked was e.g. the basic editions elf class, you can easily emulate that class by elfs being eldritch knights.

That also applies to several other things which required multiclass before 5E:
E.G.
Take the criminal Background and you got basically a rogue multiclass for free.
So you got your choice of arcane trickster e.g. or wizard with criminal background.
And that is ok and sufficient, you do not need a thief wizard multiclass instead.
Your arcane trickster will backstab and hide .
Your criminal wizard is a bit better at casting and that's it.
He is still e.g. the groups best caster (fulfilling my balanced strengths and weaknesses theorem from above)
whereas being symmetric thief / mage he would be mediocre in both classes and lag behind single classes.

Sure.

 

[Ancalagon]

If I roll stupidly good I normally pick a weaker option or something non standard. Halfling dual wielder champion

That's the way to go. Have great stats? Try that somewhat awkward character design. It's when people roll great (or worse, "roll" great) and then powergame on top of that to excess that it gets gross...

 

[Zmajdusa]

Elves get +2 to dex, in point buy you can buy up to a 15. That is a 17 Dex, and fighters have 2 feats by 6, and elven accuracy can boost dex by +1

 

[Nikioko]

Any comments to my post?

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Any comments to my post?

Its doable. Worth noting that you don't get to swap out invocations etc when you take the cleric level, but only when you take another warlock level after you take the level in cleric.

Its certainly not going to break anything or be overpowered: Eldritch Blast doesn't gain that much from critting since the main benefit of it over other cantrips is adding the ability score, which isn't affected by critting.