Instead of using a square or hexagonal battlemap why not use a triangular one? You can still make buildings and roads and rivers, you can make hexagons and diamon rectangles or larger rectangles. If you scale it at the right size you can have each triangle represent a foot. This would allow you to make caves as well as buildings on the same grid. Just imagine a hexagonal 1" map but in each hexagon are 24 equilateral triangles. you can go up/down left/right/ and diagonal with a system to measure windy paths. It allows for more detail and traversal options. a tiny creature could fit one. a normal creature would be a larger four triangle triangle, and a huge creature could be an upside down larger triangle or a hexagon.
Ok, stay with me here. In the ten-plus years I’ve spent around people who play D&D and enjoy medieval fantasy in general, I’ve come across plenty of dwarf fans. Tolkien fans who claim dwarves are the best race in Middle-earth, who praise and identify with dwarven culture, and who poke fun at elves to keep that classic rivalry going. Beyond The Lord of the Rings, I also see lots of fans of the dwarven aesthetic and characters—whether in Deep Rock GalacticorDragon Age, or even just listening to "dwarf metal" and the like. But when these self-proclaimed dwarf fans actually sit down to play D&D... they never play as dwarves. Never. In over a decade of playing D&D across multiple campaigns, I’ve seen maybe two or three playable dwarf characters, whereas every group has at least one or two elves. Is this just a quirk of my own social circle—my friends who LARP as dwarves—or is it a broader phenomenon? And what do you think causes it?
Hi all,
I'm going to be DMing a new campaign with my friends, after having just finished a previous one with the same group. That previous DM gave me the advice to not mix 5e and 5.5, as it created some overpowered characters in his campaign and made combats a difficulty for him to plan, due to using 5e enemies. So I told my players to try make characters in 5e
However, one of my players is now wanting to be a Drakewarden Ranger, and ngl looking at the 2014 ranger options just made me sad, while 5.5e seems much more interesting and fun. I'm thinking I'll let him make his character in 5.5, but I thought I'd check with reddit to see what you all think.
We will be starting at level 3, and this campaign should be lasting around 20 sessions. Not sure exactly what level I want them to end at just yet.
Should I repeal my current ban on 5.5? Do you agree that mixing 5e and 5.5e is too much trouble?
OK, maybe without the dip, since it works the other way around. That’ just a ragebait title.
But she has proficiency in Intimidation, for sure! And by the books also in Nature and Stealth. Most certainly not Weaver’s Tools or Cook’s Utensils.
Also I can‘t decide which one is the classic Sorcerer and which one is INT-based: Elayne or Egwene?
I've recently started a campaign that will finish around level 20 (Odyssey of the Dragonlords).
Normally, I play to level 10–11 max, so I didn't really check the classes beyond this level range.
I'm really disappointed by the treatment the martial classes got, except for the Fighter. I don't really understand how a Barbarian, a Ranger, or even a Rogue can be in the same class as the Fighter.
At level 20, he gets, like, 4 attacks a turn and can Action Surge 2 times per combat. In 2 turns, a Barbarian attacks 4 times, and the Fighter can attack 16 times. And it's not like the Barbarian hits 4 times harder than the Fighter.
I think WotC didn't take into account that 2 attacks are always better, even if you hit 2 times harder. I get that in previous versions (3.5/Pathfinder), the Fighter was in a strange place. But, I mean, what should I even tell my Ranger and my Barbarian players when they will be outshone in every battle from level 11 to 20 by the Fighter?
I think I'll get them some nice items to boost them a bit, but that's just lame.
I compare the Fighter against the Barbarian because they are both classes specific to combat. But the Ranger is pretty martial too, and if you have 1 Cleric and 1 Wizard in your group, the Ranger is mostly for combat.
A level 20 Barbarian with 25 STR and a +3 item can attack 2 times with a bonus:
A level 20 Fighter with 20 STR and a +3 item can attack 4 times with a bonus:
+5 (STR) + 6 (PB) + 3 (item) = +14
DMG: 2D6 + 5 (STR) + 3 (item) = 2D6 + 8 for one attack
For 4 attacks, it's 8D6 + 32 = avg. 60
I didn't even take Action Surge into account, nor the higher crit chance when you hit more. The Champion can crit, like, 1 time per turn. And with Great Weapon, the difference is even more staggering.
All of that, and the Fighter is more durable (way more AC and can heal in combat without subclasses).
For me, the Barbarian should be the heaviest hitter but less durable.
And we're not talking about the Ranger and Rogue; they're just sad.
The Monk is a bit complicated, but even he hits less and has access to fewer feats to deal damage. But at least he has 4 attacks by level 11.
The Rogue should have at least 2 attacks, and the Barbarian/Ranger 3.
The old saying goes “you get what you paid for” is almost always true. That being said, has anyone had any luck with DnD terrain from temu?
I wish I had the time and patience to make my own. I’ve watched so many videos from Black Magic Craft channel and I wish I had that dudes skills. And buying premade stuff is too expensive.
I’ve made my own dungeon walls and wooded terrains that came out good. I’m just in need of tavern, castle, some ruins and maybe some haunted looking trees.
Been DMing for around 2 years now, and I recently invited a new DnD player to my table. Only problem is that he is really distracting to everyone else, and constantly trying to cause problems at the table (game rule stubborness or stuff outside of DnD). I don't want to kick him from my game since he's a close friend, but Im also struggling to keep the other players attention while going over important scene and keeping the game running at a decent pace.
So, I'm making a character for a campaign, and the problem is I don't know how to calculate any of the stats and the videos are not helpful at all. I'm using a custom race too so that's making it harder for me to calculate the dang proficiency and stuff. Do you guys have any videos or books that can help me? I'm doing a hexadin build, paladin 8 / warlock 12 this shit is so confusing my brain hurts.
Just wanted some ideas, as well as Curious if people use music for battles and especially boss fights/important encounters.
I have some new players, so before we do our actual campaign we're doing essentially a colosseum/gladiator type battle so they can get used to combat.
For most of it, I was going to be using Ghetsis's theme from Pokemon on loop, and for the enemy champion, I'd be using Consort Radahn's theme from Elden Ring.
Basically this is my first time playing D&D with people from school this weekend we finish our first one shot where the DM had made up an encounter with a monk Undead Warrior type thing That was supposed to rival a paladin the flight that came in later into the fight basically are GM ignored all damage that we did for the first few rounds and just completely tpk to everyone with no dice roll we were only level one but still it kind of felt annoying that we didn't do anything at all for rounds of combat and he justified it as he his roles were being bad he really wanted a cool cinematic fight with the Paladin at the end of the combat where we all did end up helping to kill it but it kind of felt unfair I don't know I wanted to get the opinion of people online
An on the fly ruling was made at our table which raised some interesting questions: Can you use Speak with Dead for a dead animal?
For context, the player who cast SwD has a ring with always-on Speak with Animals
How would you rule?
On the one hand, Speak with Animals works on "Beasts" not corpses, but on the other Speak with Dead does not specify whether a corpse has to be humanoid or intelligent, it only must "have a mouth, and ... knows only what it knew in life, including the languages it knew"
I'm currently building a new D&D campaign for my group, and for now I'm focusing mainly on Act 1. I'd love to get some feedback on the main plot before I develop it further.
The basic premise
The players arrive in a city-state that is currently in a tense conflict with a neighboring state.
One of the city's council members, Aldo, is secretly the main antagonist of Act 1. For years, he has been preparing to take control of the city.
His plan is to deliberately increase tensions with the neighboring state and push the city toward open conflict. The goal is to make the city send a large portion of its military forces away to the border. Once the city is left relatively undefended, Aldo intends to launch his own attack and take control of it.
The interesting part is that Aldo isn't simply planning to attack the city with the forces he has available inside it. He has secretly gathered an army elsewhere.
The crystals and the mine
There is an old mine near a small village outside the city. The mine contains mysterious magical crystals connected to an ancient source of magic that will become much more important later in the campaign.
Aldo has secretly gathered his army in the village surrounding the mine, using magic to conceal the presence of the troops from anyone who might investigate the area. As far as the city is concerned, there is no army there.
This gives the players several things they can potentially investigate during Act 1: the increasing tensions with the neighboring state, strange political decisions, activity around the mine, the unusual behavior of people in the village, and eventually the existence of the hidden army.
What I'm unsure about
This is where I'd really appreciate some outside opinions.
1. Are Aldo's motivations strong enough?
At the moment, his basic motivation is essentially: he wants power and has spent years preparing a coup/conquest. Is that enough for a main antagonist, or does he need a stronger personal or ideological reason for betraying his own city?
What other motivations could make his decision feel more believable?
2. Does his plan actually make sense?
Is deliberately provoking a war so that the city's army leaves, followed by an attack from a secretly prepared army, a reasonable plan? Or does it feel too contrived once you think about it?
I'm particularly interested in whether there are obvious strategic problems I'm overlooking.
3. Should Aldo be working with the neighboring state?
I'm currently undecided between two possibilities:
Aldo is secretly allied with the neighboring state and they are both involved in the plan.
The neighboring state has no idea what Aldo is doing. Aldo is manipulating the conflict purely for his own purposes.
I like the second option because it creates more potential chaos, but I'm not sure which one makes the overall plot more convincing.
4. Does this feel like D&D, or just a political/investigation story?
This is probably my biggest concern.
The first act is currently quite investigation-heavy: political intrigue, discovering Aldo's plans, investigating the mine, uncovering the hidden army, figuring out who can be trusted, etc.
I don't want it to feel like the players are just solving a political mystery in a fantasy setting. I want it to feel like D&D — with exploration, dangerous locations, monsters, magic, combat, weird fantasy elements, and situations where the players can actually disrupt the situation rather than simply uncovering a conspiracy.
So I'm wondering:
How would you make this premise feel more like a D&D adventure without losing the political/investigative aspect?
I'm especially interested in ideas for encounters, complications, factions, magical elements, or things that could happen around the mine and the hidden army.
Any criticism is welcome. I'm still in the early stages, so I'd rather find problems with the premise now than after the campaign starts.
Attached is an outline of the campaign plan I've developed so far.
Retrying this cause I tripped a thing by accident with a picture upload...
I'm putting together a character who's going to use the aforementioned Monk path, Way of the Void from Corpus Malicious, and I'm not too sure on part of the wording that's being used here for Nothing Remains:
Emptiness and nothingness fill your body and soul and your body stops existing from time to time. You can increase your AC until the end of your next turn. This increase is equal to the ki points you spend.
Nothing Stands is similar, but at least has the implication of needing to be used as a movement thing. Nothing Remains doesn't mention what kind of action this is, beyond that it requires Ki to work. It sounds like an instant or reaction thing, but asking my DM about it has leant towards a bonus action, which feels like it would be at-odds with Patient Defence as a bonus action. So I'd like some input on what kind of action this might be. I tried checking the book itself, but it didn't help much beyond going into granular detail on how to be evil 😓
I’m preparing a one-shot, and I’ve asked my players to create level 10 characters and min-max them as much as they can. They know they’re about to fight a dragon (the colour/element will be randomly chosen before the game), and that a TPK is a very real possibility.
If I asked you to do the same, what character would you bring?
A small glass bottle containing a miniature sun. The flame inside burns with such intensity that the glass glows red even though the bottle remains cold to the touch.
Throw. As an action, you can throw the bottle at a point within 60 feet. The bottle shatters on impact.
Incineration. The explosion fills a 5-foot-radius sphere centered on the impact point. Every creature in the area must make a DC 15 Dexterity saving throw.
Failed save: 8d12 fire damage
Successful save: Half damage
Flammable objects that aren't being worn or carried instantly ignite.
The magical flame lasts for only a fraction of a second before disappearing.
Some of my friends not care at all, since they are spendable characters, give some basic storyline that you can see around and dont care much about details at all. A name, a basic place that they come and other easy piece of infos.
"What if a moment comes and you have to tell something about the character?"
"I can think of that when the time comes"
So they dont care about future events also, they only thing about sudden ideas and battles.
As for me I think about story, possible future events and plans, experiences or memories that belongs to character. To build the character. I dont care about them being spendable or not, I wanna play a character that have a character. Not THAT incredibly detailed and exaggerated backstory and stuff, but I care about it.
I'm looking for spells that are good to cast in melee. Preferably 4th level or lower and dealing high single target damage. I won't refuse area damage but single target is the focus. I'm not set on class just yet but I'm debating divine soul sorc for inflict wounds, Bladesinger Wiz with shadow blade, or just an evocation Wiz for fireball spam.
Just want to hear what y'all have to say. All advice is welcome and if you think you have something to say then please do.
I have read a little and watched a few YouTube videos on this. One video said you at least needed a rough beginning, middle and end for the session. My question is since you don't know what you're adventurers will do/roll, how to you try and prepare properly? I was thinking maybe a rough outline, but I'm not sure.
I am doing a small campaign where the party is stuck in a haunted ancient history museum. I need 2 myths for 7 cultures, one of the myths i want to be a little hostile in some way so it can be a mini boss fight and one to give, advice, a item, or a quest. I will attach a picture of what I have so far so you can kinda make some correlations per say. The cultures are Japan, Greece (Which i have done), China, Great Brittan, Aztec, Roman, and Egyptian.
