Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I think that's right - and it still sounds odd to me too!

 infinite_array wrote:
So, correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't seem to find anything about a Paladin needing to be Lawful Good only. Is that right?

That is right you get traditional paladins with the oath of devotion, oath of the ancients is good with no concern for law or chaos and oath of vengeance are neutral or lawful neutral.

As I mentioned several times ITT, alignment is a non-thing in 5E (same as 4E).

Some of my friends want to roll up characters for the starter adventure since the PHB is already in a few hands. My question is if I allow variant options do I make that universal or is it something that varies? The main issue is people wanting to make human using the variant to get a Feat at level 1, but does that mean all the races should use their variants or mix and match? I personally won't have my book till Monday or Tuesday and I am trying to figure out what to say.

I am not sure other races have variants similar to the human issue. Even if they do, it's still a matter for the DM and player to negotiate rather than a "take one, take all" rules issue. In other words, it might be kind of dickish to allow only one player to use a variant but it won't break the game mechanically, nor will allowing everyone to use variants if they want to do so.

 Manchu wrote:
I am not sure other races have variants similar to the human issue. Even if they do, it's still a matter for the DM and player to negotiate rather than a "take one, take all" rules issue. In other words, it might be kind of dickish to allow only one player to use a variant but it won't break the game mechanically, nor will allowing everyone to use variants if they want to do so.

I'd also comment that if you know your players well enough, you could probably let the guy who loves to RPG do it, but not the "powergamer" (the one who'd want to do this to give them a perceived hand up in the game)

They are almost all power gamers, so I expect lots of humans. Normally I would have time to go over it but since I won't have the book till early next week I thought I would ask those who do have it what they thought.

if they're all powergamers, I'd say judge it on individual merit.

Honestly none of the feats are massively overpowering at lvl1 and given some of the other races abilities it is a fair trade for a human.

I have been looking myself and I am taking half elf, as it has a nice mixture of fluff and crunch with+2 to cha and 2x+1's of your choice plus an extra language ontop of common and elven, plus darkvision and resistance to charm and immunity to sleep

The option of the Feat is much better than the standard Human option, unless your player rolled all odd numbers (15, 15, 13, 13, 9, 9, for example). In comparison to the other stuff that races get, I don't know that I regard it as a powergamer choice. I mean, Tieflings get spells for free, Dwarves can make wizards in heavy armour and High Elf Eldritch Knights are rocking the perfect stats and an extra cantrip. The races are meant to be strong influences on the character, since otherwise why bother having them in the game?

Many of the feats either improve a given fighting style without adding any numbers to the attack roll. My group just hit level four, halfway through Cragmaw Castle, and they spent a goodly while looking over the Feats. None of them actually took any, which I thought was interesting. Let's look at my Archer PC and see why.

I recommended that he take the Sharpshooter feat, which lets you use a bow more competently, ignoring cover and range modifiers and adding a Power Attack option, but does nothing for your actual to-hit or to-damage rolls. So my player considered it, then decided to just raise his Dexterity by +2, which gave him +1 to hit, +1 to damage, +1 to AC, +1 to several skills and +1 to initiative. Compared to that, Sharpshooter never had a chance.

I wonder if Feats become more of a thing when you've maxed out your primary stat? Don't they all cap at 20 now?

Yes, as a matter of ability score improvement via leveling.

Yeah, 20 is the maximum for a PC race. I checked Wish, and that doesn't affect it. Maybe magic items? I suspect not though, as they seem to be determined to keep the numbers under control.

I'm fine with a 20 cap for stats, and think it is good to have a cap on PC's, my only (half-hearted) concern is everyone showing up with a human character.

Does D&D still start with 3d6 for stats?

Being only used to/familiar with 1E, hearing about stats of 19 and 20 sounds...crazy.

Is 19 and 20 as big a deal 'now' as it was 'then'?

Keeping in mind that 19 and 20 were fairly 'godlike' back 'then'!

There are three options.

1) Roll for stats - you roll 4d6 six times, keeping the top three dice from each roll, then assign to stats as desired.
2) Point buy - I haven't looked in detail, but it is designed to let you buy up to 15s, and either have lots of average stats or three good stats and three bad ones.
3) Array - you can take the following numbers and assign as desired: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8.

In all cases you then add racial modifiers. 18 is the max you can have pre-modifiers, and 20 is the absolute max. Races generally add +2 to one stat and +1 to another, good for gettig dual 16s from the array, for example.

It's definitely interesting in that point buy this edition is slightly less than the average from rolling. 4d6 keep 3, and assign as needed is an optional method from older editions (2nd at least) and it's interesting that people are actually interested in using it.

I feel like that 'stat range' has pulled back a bit from 4th edition. Unlike 1st, in 4th and 5th you get occasional stat boosts, but about half as often in 5th.

The stat boosts are also something you must trade if you want feats. A suggestion is there's a sort of 'conservation of awesome' going on: You can go single classed, max out your prime requisite (or get close) and get one or two feats in 20 levels. Alternately, you can multi class and get two high stats, but probably won't get the feat or feats. So you either focus, and get a feat (which is awesome), or multi class and have something cool that way.

I feel that it also provides two viable ways to play: A very simple way that focuses on just getting you big numbers to swing with, or fiddly feats and stuff to mess around with and try to optimise.

I think that's a great idea. I've recently been getting my brother into D'n'D and it's been a right pain teaching him the rules. All the options in Pathfinder are pretty bewildering for someone who has never played D'n'D before. I feel like 5th is easier on a newbie.

So they updated the website to include a second Basic PDF, this one with sixty pages of monsters, magic items and DM advice. Awesome.

 Charles Rampant wrote:
So they updated the website to include a second Basic PDF, this one with sixty pages of monsters, magic items and DM advice. Awesome.

Thank you!

I like that the number of Magic Items per character is limited (3), and that you have to attune to it to get the magical properties.

Only 3 items per character?

That seems...low.

Also, what is the process to 'attune' to them?

 Alpharius wrote:
Also, what is the process to 'attune' to them?

Certain magic items require a user to attune to them before their magical properties can be used. Attuning to a magic item requires that you spend a short rest concentrating on it (this can’t be the same short rest used to learn an item’s properties). Depending on the nature of the item, this concentration can take the form of prayers, weapon practice, or meditation. In any case, the concentration period must be uninterrupted. Once you are attuned to an item, you can use its magical properties. An item can be attuned to only one creature at a time. A creature can be attuned to no more than three magic items at any given time, and you can attune yourself to only one item during a short rest.

The Identify spell tells you quickly discover what the properties are, or you can spend a uninterrupted short rest in physical contact with the item to learn its properties. It is also might be that cursed items will show up as cursed when using the Identify spell whereas the short rest version would not, so it also has that going for it. I'm fine with the low number of magic items. There are other games where magic items are falling out of every nook and cranny if that is my desire. Plus in a party of five 15 magic items is a lot of magic items. Of course all this could change between now and the DMG release in November as well.

To my understanding, the attunement thing only applies to 'serious' magic items, not trivial stuff like potions, scrolls, or other low-level stuff. The expectation is it's to keep a character from carrying multiple magic weapons for different circumstances on top of magic armor, etc.

Three is enough for a weapon, armor, and one other major item per character.

Good point!

I guess I'd like to see what counts as a 'major' magic item that also counts towards that 'only 3' limit.

I reckon limiting the number of magic items is not a bad thing, especially if you want to differentiate yourself from Pathfinder, where the number of different bonuses and combos can get a bit unwieldy for GMs and players.

Just taking a break after running/playing in 41 sessions of pathfinder over the past while. I like the system, especially the searchable SRD, but the level of fiddly detail and clunkyness does wear on me over time. The next game I run will be a 5th edition game.

 Balance wrote:
To my understanding, the attunement thing only applies to 'serious' magic items, not trivial stuff like potions, scrolls, or other low-level stuff. The expectation is it's to keep a character from carrying multiple magic weapons for different circumstances on top of magic armor, etc.

Three is enough for a weapon, armor, and one other major item per character.

Two weapon fighters get the shaft again I guess.

Depends on what counts as a 'serious/major' magic item though, doesn't it?

 Alpharius wrote:
Good point!

I guess I'd like to see what counts as a 'major' magic item that also counts towards that 'only 3' limit.

Agreed because of the characters that I've ran, and of the magic items they've acquired I would say that, thus far the only "major" magic items that I've gotten were armor, weapon, neck slot/ or shield.

Usually things like helmets (depending on the individual item) or boots tend to give a decent bonus that is applicable either everywhere, so long as the item is worn, or it's fairly useful in only select circumstances.