Nine of Wands edition

>"New" Arcane Subclasses UA: https://media.dndbeyond.com/compendium-images/ua/arcane-subclasses/zepvK7DBkeSt6dqv/UA2025-ArcaneSubclasses.pdf

>2024 PHB Scan (No more fingers edition)
https://files.catbox.moe/g8oo9h.pdf

>Cropped and rotated, but more artifacty
MjAyNCBQSEIsIE5vIFRodW1icywgT0NSZWQsIEFub24ncyBCb29rbWFya3MgdHJhbnNmZXJyZWQgb3Zlci4gCgpodHRwczovL2Vhc3l1cGxvYWQuaW8vd2Fvcm9h

>2024 DMG
https://files.catbox.moe/fd04pq.pdf

>2024 Monster Manual
https://files.catbox.moe/atd38s.pdf (D&D beyond version)
https://pomf2.lain.la/f/1en5qwum.pdf (scan, use at your own risk)

>2024 Official free rules
https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dnd/free-rules
>2014 Official Free Rules
https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dnd/basic-rules-2014

>2024 UA
https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dnd/ua

>2014 Errata
https://dnd.wizards.com/dndstudioblog/sage-advice-book-updates

>5etools (2024)
http://5e.tools
>5etools (2014)
https://2014.5e.tools/

>Trove
The Trove Vault (seed, please!): mega(dot)nz/folder/uktzzTAI#KfV-EWdhd15FhHNn5HndHg

>Resources:
https://pastebin.com/X1TFNxck

Previous thread
>>96127744

>TQ
How hard are your games? Do you just breeze through the encounters, do you have to use tactics, or do characters regularly die?

>BTQ
Should PCs get scars or other signs of a life of violence over time?

>>96165516 (OP)
>TQ
I always ask my DM to run things on hard-mode. I leave it up to them woth what that means.
>BTQ
I always roleplay stuff like that. Burns scars especially, getting fireballed in the face would fuck you up.

>>96165516 (OP)
>How hard are your games? Do you just breeze through the encounters, do you have to use tactics, or do characters regularly die?
My group of four (Whispers Bard, Moon Druid, Champion Fighter and Fiend Warlock) will always be on the edge of dying after encounters with one or more having been unconscious at least once, we have to think about everything that we do and we all find that very enjoyable.

>>96165516 (OP)
>How hard are your games? Do you just breeze through the encounters, do you have to use tactics, or do characters regularly die?
I've had many characters nearly die lately. As DM I've been having my monsters try to finish people off too while they're on the ground. I think I can be a bit too lenient sometimes as well trying to avoid people dying but the D&D day is in the middle of my work week so I'm always very tired. I'd reschedule but it's also the best day because of daycare.

5e should have more animal kin races

>>96165893
You can't be trusted with the ones it already has, anon.

>>96163504
reposting

>i looked through a video and it just seems so much worse now
>what were the buffs? do you get more than 2 per short rest?
-free skills are nice, it previously gave nature or arcana and now gives both
-You get shots base on INT/short rest. So if you invest in 16 INT, you get at least 1 extra shot per vs the previous version, easy enough to get with a starting INT of 15 and a feat like fey touched or shadow touched. you could dump INT if you think you can reliably get a headband of intellect and if you really invest, you could get up to 5 shot/short rest.
-scaling damage dice. The old version just has 0d6/2d6 and doubles at 18th level. Now all shots do damage, and progressively get stronger at 10th, 15th, and 18th
-Every ready shot moves down to 7th from 15th so you get more shots in a day for most of the campaign

Grasping was nerfed, but every other shot was buffed to either do damage initially or do more damage, or buffed via the scaling granted at other levels.

Beguiling now let you choose yourself as a target of admiration, so the enemy can't attack you. piercing now deals 2 die rolls of damage, if you can line up two targets, that's (d8+2d6+DEX)x2, save for half. Even better if you can line up a third in a hallway. And I suppose being able to use any ranged weapon should also go without saying. Obviously a buff, even if it was handwaved by some DMs.

Y'all, when dey gonna fuckin' fix the skill system?!

>>96166832
>ai slop and vague question about issues
they aint, they just pushed their revision that kept the skill system as is, with additional clarification on how to use skills w/ items

>Should PCs get scars or other signs of a life of violence over time?

Yes

>>96166832
It's not broken, but it's not impressive either. Really wish that if a feature gave you a skill or a list of skills, and another features did the same, that it gave expertise. Excluding features that say "choose any skill"

Pic related is a good example because it references a barbs class skills. The skilled origin feat is a good example of what wouldn't count.

>>96166832
What's wrong with it?

>>96165516 (OP)
>How hard are your games? Do you just breeze through the encounters, do you have to use tactics, or do characters regularly die?
As a DM I like running campaigns that start off easy, leading to an "ohh shit" moment, and throwing in overwhelming encounters with outs and cheats so players feel autonomous.

>>96166898
Personally, I think players should get scars. That way they'd get into character easier. Always carry my knoife for that reason.

>>96167077
Or axe

>>96167080
Axes aren't subtle, might hurt them. I just wanna scar them.

>>96167042
It's very narrow and isn't a good display of skill. For the former, outside a rogue or bard, you can only be mediocre at 1-2 things. I mean having pb+6 over someone who is not skilled in the same check is a 30% higher chance for success. A 20th level wizard and a 1st level wizard have only a difference of 30% difference between each other aside from INT.


5e is like 85% magic, and 15% other.

>>96166898
>>96167077
Scars are a gateway to girl cringe. They're fine to have, but bring up your own scars to talk about as a topic of conversation is lame.

>>96166832
I'm not sure what there is to fix about d20+stat+prof

>>96165893
The existing ones are already too much bloat
>hippos
FUCK OFF

>>96167167
>>96165893
The only reason to gain more animal races is if there is a 3rd party Redwall book released. We have far too many races as it is.

>bout to play 2024 for the first time
>looking at it mechanically
>considering wizard-dipped or magic initiate cleric OR armor-dipped wizard
If I do that and then the usual 2014 things, spirit guardians, web/hypnotic pattern/fear/sleet storm, is this just fine at a table not super optimizing?

>>96167508
You'll be outed as a meta fag but, otherwise, nothing really.

>>96167530
>You'll be outed as a meta fag
They already know, and I don't care.

I wanna kick one of my players but it would objectively be immoral. He's ok I guess, shows up on time, a bit of a metagaming cunt. Has some horrible soulless optimized bladesinger stupid character that he 100% pulled from some dumb website and that doesn't really work for the table because you cant really give him any interesting loot since he uses very specific shit, and then the character concept he described as a warrior doesnt actually match at all with how he plays him (casting fireball and ritual detect magic non stop). Every time I decide to stop feeding attacks into his AC so he feels good and instead throw a blight at him he dies instantly, so combat is just binary. Also he tends to act without checking with other players which is just eye rolling
I wonder if I should just find a satisfying way to kill the character and then see if he fares better with something else, or if these kinds of players are just gonna be a problem no matter what

>>96167548
This is what most people do
>Cancel the game with some bullshit excuse
>Remake the discord or group chat, whatever the fuck without him
>Continue as normal
Personally I just completely ignore their character like they don't even exist. Nobody attacks them, NPCs barely acknowledge them, and I never add in anything related to their character or backstory.

>>96167563
yeah but that would be immoral, since I wouldnt want it done to me, I am not gonna do it to someone else
I think im gonna throw some extra spotlight at him to have one last chance to see if I can get some enjoyment out of his character and his playing of it, and if not im gonna have a conversation and explain what's going on, and give him a choice of changing or playing something else or leaving

>>96167581
>yeah but that would be immoral, since I wouldnt want it done to me, I am not gonna do it to someone else
You sound deeply autistic

>>96167548
>doesn't really work for the table because you cant really give him any interesting loot since he uses very specific shit,
Unless he's buying shit (MAGIC ITEMS SELL FOR HALF), tough luck. He gets what he gets, and he has no reason to get upset.

>Every time I decide to stop feeding attacks into his AC so he feels good and instead throw a blight at him he dies instantly, so combat is just binary
And if he wasn't a blade singer, everything would kill him just as quickly, so what really is the difference?

>>96165893
But it already has several flavors of gnomes.

>>96167548
he is a wizard, of course he is going to use spells like fireball, what the fuck?
he could potentially use shadow blade and a shortsword, attacking with shadow blade, booming blade with short sword (since bb needs a weapon with a cost) and then twf bonus action attack with shadowblade again if you want him to be more martial oriented from level 6 but are you going to force that on him?

>>96167077
Full comic btw

>>96168499
I just want a character that works for me as an unpaid dm who gets paid in satisfaction of designing loot for PCs and designing encounters that match strengths and challenge weaknesses and in seeing PCs that fit the world in which they adventure.
Bladesinger is just so terribly designed I should have just banned from the start. The flavor doesn’t work and the optimal play is to just be a wizard. This combined with a low creativity player creates a character that just doesn’t become well rooted and interesting

>>96169238
This issue is your own fault. Not because you didn't ban Bladesinger, but because you refuse to adjust your own play. Stop creating situations where the solution is just run away and Fireball. Like anon said, any other Wizard and he would be playing the same way regardless, except you'd be knocking him down with one attack instead of one saving throw.

>>96169527
What an absolute retarded comment. A class is so badly designed flavor wise that the optimal way to play is to go against the flavor, and your answer is to completely eliminate a specific combat scenario as if that was the issue. Way to completely miss the whole point

>>96169617
you could look at old illrigger (not revised) and at architect of ruin because it is kinda like eldritch knight but it can both use extra attack and then cast any illusion spell as a reaction which i think is pretty cool, it does also get up to 6th level spells so the progression is faster than a paladin
you could try rewriting bladesinger that way

>>96169638
yeah I think the options are
new character
different class
rework bladesinger so it doesnt just play like a wizard. The problem is there is a lot (ritual casting, lvl 9 spells, scroll scribing, etc) that is so fundamentally "wizard" because of this stupid simplistic 5e where subclasses cannot alter the main class, it's almost impossible to extricate the wizardness

>>96167508
Just play cleric or wizard. What do you need the dip for?

Well, it's good to see that people are still actually talking about playing, these days, I suppose.

>TQ
I made three books of character sheets, back in the day. I wish I could say that I had a chance to use them, but alas.
>BTQ
Scars are for important wounds, lol

>>96169959
>Handbook of eros
L-lewd

>>96169851
The best option is removing bladesinger.

>>96170333

I probably should have seen that coming.

It's probably why the pages stick together.

>>96166832
Niggas need to make a Fartfaggotable's Tome of Skillz n' shiet to give guidance on how to use skills.

>>96169617
Maybe don't be such a fag about the "optimal" way to play, then. The fact is that as a Wizard, there are countless situations where melee attacking is simply worse than casting a spell. In order to equate standard Wizard play, a gish Wizard would need to at least be able to package a full spell into their attack action. Otherwise, it's straight up wasted resources.

Ideally, a Bladesinger is supposed to be able to take advantage of bonus action spells more, but nobody gives a fuck about that rule. But thousands of DMs run Bladesinger players fine, so it sounds like a skill issue on your part.

>>96170906
I think you're just too much of a video game player to understand the problem but ill try one last time. The class may be wizard, but that's not the character's concept. The concept is of a warrior who uses spells to enhance himself. However, because the bladesinger is so poorly designed and 5e is so simplistic, its features lead to a playstyle that is exactly the same as any other wizard, ie cast fireballs. I dont care about optimal play, I care about characters that make sense. His character doesnt

>>96167743
No, that's empathy, which is kind of the opposite of autism.

>>96169238
I've never DMed, so I can't really offer advice on encounter design, but why is it so hard to design loot for him? He's a wizard who also uses a weapon, so give him a magic weapon of the type he uses, or stuff to enhance his spells, or give him spell scrolls to copy into his spellbook. If he uses an unusual weapon type, create a magic item that shapes itself into any weapon the user wants. It doesn't seem like a hard problem to fix, unless there are some details you haven't mentioned that make it impractical.

>>96171022
Most normalfags have zero empathy and will gladly ghost people. Having strict rules as well as black and white thinking is autism.

Why are they all smiling? It looks retarded.

>>96171251
I'm not a huge fan of designing hyper specific items or flat vertical upgrades. He basically picked one weapon type at lvl1, and the class design and finesse rules only allows him to use that weapon type effectively. I generally dislike characters that are "i only use this", "im bound to this" because it limits the possibilities of thinking of cool weapons. I've been dropping scrolls and other stuff, and yeah I dropped a cool shortsword. But then 5 lvls later I have to drop... another shortsword or rapier. The most boring shit ever.

Now if he was any other class with all kinds of proficiencies, you could play with different kind of loot. For example a ranger archer, suddenly finds a badass crossbow, that's fun and interesting. Do they switch, they learn how to use, etc. Lots of flavor there and tiny rp moments to be had just from that. Then some other type of ranged weapon. They finally, the most badass longbow ever and we come full circle. That's interesting, that's fun.

If he was a proper wizard, I could drop all kinds of staffs, rods, wands, focii, etc, that reinforce that vibe and style. But this class is so moronic, you're a gish in name only, you don't actually know how to use different weapons, and again, above all else, casting fireballs is still better than anything you could do.

Again, the point is character fit. He's been playing a wizard. I can let him play a wizard the way he's been playing. I can give him wizard loot. But that's not the fucking character I was sold. He's not supposed to be a "wizard" in the traditional sense. And I cannot blame him, because playing this subclass like a wizard is what the mechanics incentivize

>>96170943
NTA but it sounds like you think he should engage in melee more often. There are ways to encourage that. Use enemies with high Dex saves or rogues with Evasion. Include hostages or other noncombatants to discourage indiscriminate fireballing. Have other mages counterspell him.

>>96171404
Modern fantasy art is so shit. What are they doing, posing for a fucking picture or some shit?

>>96171405
>But then 5 lvls later I have to drop... another shortsword or rapier
You are playing 5e right? You are under no obligation to even give out magic items. Retarded take

>He’s just playing a wizard but his background is a warrior
Wizards are warriors too at least in 5e. Just because they fight with spells doesn’t mean they’re any less heroic. With the change to cantrips being all day wizards and other casters have been fundamentally changed. Magic is now something they can do all day.

Sounds like it’s more that you don’t like the character than the player.

>>96171404
Part of the larger trend of 5.5 art being less serious overall.

>>96171404
The only character that looks half-decent here is the futa demon.

>>96170943
>The concept is of a warrior who uses spells to enhance himself
That's Eldritch Knight. A Bladesinger is a Wizard first and foremost.

>>96171405
You are, in fact, autistic. Just be a little creative you retard.
>Magic amulet that allows him to cast any spell as a bonus action
>But cursed so that you can only cast within 5 feet
If he unattunes from it, it permanently breaks his fingers.

>>96171467
I think that’s for two reasons
>Designed by Larian not WoTC
>White male couldn’t be allowed to look manly or threatening

>>96171404
Jarlaxle is smiling because he's the only male Drow with a licence to do so.

>>96171522
That's goofy. Minsc is the archetypal big burly idiot hero. In his own words, there is strength in numbers, and he is two or three at least.

>>96171543
Yup, and they made him shorter than Karlach. WoTC are fucking retards.

>>96171405
Well, ultimately, it is his character, not yours. If he wants to just sling spells and ignore the other stuff, that's his right. I also don't personally think there's anything wrong with a character sticking to one weapon. Some people just enjoy that as a character concept.

>Now if he was any other class with all kinds of proficiencies, you could play with different kind of loot. For example a ranger archer, suddenly finds a badass crossbow, that's fun and interesting. Do they switch, they learn how to use, etc. Lots of flavor there and tiny rp moments to be had just from that. Then some other type of ranged weapon. They finally, the most badass longbow ever and we come full circle. That's interesting, that's fun.
Perhaps, but they'd have to sacrifice their extra attack to use that crossbow, or they'd have to take Crossbow Expert, but if they do the latter, it would feel like a waste if they later find a great longbow. Or you could make it a special crossbow that ignores the loading property somehow, like a repeating crossbow, but it sounds like that's not something you'd want to do.

It would probably be best if you just treated his character as a wizard. I have to admit I'm having a bit of trouble understanding why you're so upset. It kind of seems like you're just bothered by him not playing his class the way you'd play it, which I can't say I agree with.

>>96171404
Probably because that’s how those characters are?

It’d be like asking why is Drizzt look like an emo

>>96171575
That's also goofy. Karlach's definitely taller than most men even without her horns, but Minsc is huge.

>>96171635
>I have to admit I'm having a bit of trouble understanding why you're so upset. It kind of seems like you're just bothered by him not playing his class the way you'd play it, which I can't say I agree with.
the concept of the character was a warrior who uses magic to fight better. The concept is not being realized, because instead there's a wizard throwing fireballs. I want the actual events happening to fit the concept, or the concept to change, but I cant have both mismatch, it's simple. The subclass flavor sells a concept, the way to actually play the subclass is 180 degrees from it.s

>>96171650
I think the issue is more with what exactly the image is telling as a story. It looks like a posed shot someone would take with a camera. Not us peeking into an adventure and seeing them in action. There are generic ruins or something in the background. They’re smiling like someone just said “say cheese”. It looks like shit.

>>96171685
>the concept of the character was a warrior who uses magic to fight better
A fireball isn’t fighting? What else would it be a cheap way to demolish a house?

>>96171714
In the earlier editions, a quick way to wipe the party because someone didn't know how explosions expand in enclosed spaces.

>>96171685
Was that what the player said the character was, or are you just saying that yourself because they picked Bladesinger?

>>96171405
This shit could be so easy
>elven longsword/greatsword, can be used while in the bladesong
>ring of evasion, to help with DEX saves if that's an issue
>amulet of health
>magic ring that can be used to convert AC points into % HP healing

the champion is the best class in the game!

>>96172090
It feels more like parts of the main class being broken off to make a subclass. The same way Open hand and Mercy should really be rolled into primary monk.

>>96171404
D&D's target audience is middle schoolers you know. They have book deals with schools and colleges

>>96171404
I really hope WotC never touches Gord, even if they are publishing Greyhawk now. I hate how they've flanderized Minsc.

>>96172695

>>96169238
>Bladesinger is just so terribly designed I should have just banned from the start
Its design is that it doesn't fall lover in melee combat and it succeeds at it.
>The flavor doesn’t work and the optimal play is to just be a wizard.
The optimal play for a wizard is to be a wizard. Yea, that checks out

>fireball deals 6d6 damage.

Does the wizard still spam it, or are weapon attacks now more viable?

>>96172756
The Wizard spams Lightning Bolt.
Weapon attacks are already viable though, that's not the issue with martials.

>>96172789
lighting bolt doing 8d6 is fine because of how unwieldy it is. Unless you're in a hallway, you're lucky to hit 3 targets.

>>96172789
If he's not in danger of running out of spells that's on you retard.

>>96171839
>Was that what the player said the character was, or are you just saying that yourself because they picked Bladesinger?
it's what he said when pitching the character

>>96172981
I'll be real with you. You sound like the problem not the player.

>>96172756
No weapon hits everyone in a 20-foot radius, so the wizard will still use Fireball often. Also, wizard weapon attacks are beyond viable with 5.5's version of True Strike:
>https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/2619204-true-strike?srsltid=AfmBOopnGhO8M-GJgDO0uPwPh1li_n71pLyiRetWQ29gpK418n7ubiT8

>Guided by a flash of magical insight, you make one attack with the weapon used in the spell’s casting. The attack uses your spellcasting ability for the attack and damage rolls instead of using Strength or Dexterity. If the attack deals damage, it can be Radiant damage or the weapon’s normal damage type (your choice).

>Cantrip Upgrade. Whether you deal Radiant damage or the weapon’s normal damage type, the attack deals extra Radiant damage when you reach levels 5 (1d6), 11 (2d6), and 17 (3d6).

I know the old version was completely useless, but they massively overcorrected here.

Why are weapon AOE considered bad here?

>>96173066
More viable is the operative term. Other spells need to comprise between size and damage, and weapon attacks are in the same boat, they hit one target but deal very good damage. While it's a better strat to focus damage on one target rather than spread it over multiple, fireball doesn't have to compromise and does both.

But if tier 3 and 4 were more common, fireball wouldn't be as talked about.

>>96173019
His entire spergout is about hiw a player isn't playing g his character they anon wants him to. No shit anon is the problem.

>>96173208
>But if tier 3 and 4 were more common, fireball wouldn't be as talked about.
True, instead it would be upcasted Fireball.

>>96172821
The range helps, though. You can hit one guy and the guy standing 50 feet behind him. That could be useful.

>>96173019
I veto and approve character concepts when receiving game applications. The character I approved (a fighter that uses magic to enhance himself) isnt the one that is actually in the game right now (a fireball chuker with extra ac). Either we will find a mutually agreeable adjustment, retire the character or the player will leave. I have no obligation to keep something I do not enjoy in my game since I do it for free. The cohesiveness of the whole world is important to my enjoyment of it, and having a Bladesinger in it damages it, because it's simply a wizard that has extra AC for no flavorful reason, and for which the "blade" part is completely anecdotal, and in fact detrimental. It's just as stupid as some homebrew shit, and it's even worse because it's official content. The class shouldnt exist, but absent that it will not exist in my game as is.

>>96173449
>the class shouldn't exist
Imagine getting filtered by a wizard using their spells this fucking hard.

>>96173449
Run your game however you want. You sound to me like an asshole of a DM but I’ll run my own games how I want and you do you. I would encourage you to examine if you have some sort of god complex based on what you’ve said but I don’t expect much self reflection from you.

>>96173449
dude, you've gotta learn more about the forgotten realms lore

>>96173449
That sounds a little strict. I'm genuinely sorry that you're not having fun, but I also think you might want to see if you can relax a bit on things like this. I can totally understand wanting a cohesive world, but I guess I don't see how this character could be so damaging to that. It's not like he wants to play a Transformer with lasers and missiles who can turn into a fighter jet at will. He's a wizard who's adopted certain parts of an old elven tradition to boost his defenses a bit. I think that would fit into most fantasy worlds just fine.

>>96173811
>He's a wizard who's adopted certain parts of an old elven tradition to boost his defenses a bit.
but that's not his character
"my character is a fighter who uses magic to enhance himself"
why do you all think you know more about the character than the dm who literally workshopped it with the player?

>>96173614
>dude, you've gotta learn more about the forgotten realms lore
wtf does forgotten realms have to do with anything?

>>96173829
while the bladesinger isnt explicitly from any setting (due to the neutrality of d&d), the forgotten realms has a lot of information that might help shape your understanding of the classes

>>96173871
it doesn't matter
a monk isnt necessarily a character that comes from a monastery. It's a way of fighting
The way of fighting for bladesinger is to throw fireballs. It doesn't fit "a warrior who enhances himself with magic"

Goddamn, he still going?

>>96173975
Being able to throw fireballs seems like a pretty good enhancement to me. Faggot

>>96173823
Okay. He doesn't fight the way you thought he would. You expected more stabbing and less fireballing. At least that's how it seems, based on this discussion. Apart from that, you haven't said anything that makes him sound like a particularly bad player. Are you upset because you feel like he lied to you about his character? Maybe you two just had a misunderstanding and it's irritating you because you feel like you can't openly address it? I don't know, maybe I'm overanalyzing it.

>>96173823
Why are you expecting an eldritch knight from a wizard subclass?

>>96174017
nobody is upset except all you no games asking me questions. I am gonna discuss the mismatch between the character concept and how he presents his character and the actual realization of it in game, and I am certain we will arrive at a mutually satisfying solution.

>>96174069
I sincerely hope that works out.

>>96174069
>nogames
My friend, we all know to expect fireballs from a wizard. I would argue the person who doesn't understand the game is you.

What are some cool feat combinations? DM is giving us a free starting feat and I was going to be a variant human.

>>96174449
Whacha playin?

>>96174461
Undecided yet. I was going to look through feats and see if I can find anything that sticks out to me that I can maybe pair with the abilities of some class. I find that having two feats to start with can make things really interesting.
Its pretty open ended I guess, I'm just looking for some ideas.

>>96174449
The classic is polearm mastery and sentinel. Lucky with pretty much anything is great too.

>>96172119
Its something that one of my gm, rolling off some subclass into the base progression, but some felt a little bit too busted (or led to being stuck with subclasses flavor i didn't like)
>Part of Drunken Master into Monk
>Battlemaster into fighter
>Hunter into Ranger
>Berserker into Barbarian

Is there a name for a 5e campaign variant rule, where everyone is a half caster? Like how gestalt has parallel class progression?

I'm trying to think of how to make a half caster work for every class. Martial are easy enough, they get a small list of spells that augment something physical, or some other spell like speak with animals for barbarians etc. Bards and clerics are also a fine to just covert into martials with extra attack at 5th level. What I'm left with is artificer, sorcerer, warlocks, and wizards

>Artificer
Doable, but would need a rewrite for a lot of subclass features. I'm debating on just scraping the whole class and making a new "alchemist" class as an item based class that crafts consumable like potions and grenades (acid vials, alchemist flire, holy water etc.) rather than actual magic items.
>Sorcerer
Scraping the whole class and granting the other former full casters free meta magics could be cool.
>warlock
thirsting blade would be made standard, and their spell level would be scaled down to that of a half caster (5th level would give them two 2nd level spell slots which would both upgrade to 3rd at 9th level)
>wizard
Giving every wizard bladesong is out of the question. Leaving it as a subclass option just means everyone is going to play it. Without either option, would anyone actually want to play a wizard with extra attack at 5th level? Maybe I could just turn a lot of its features into feats for other classes to take.

>>96173449
Dude if you want to force a wizard to not use their spells so much, add enemies and things to your encounters to disincentivize fireball. Fire resistance, floors covered in grease, enemies with shields that bumrush him, even plain old counterspelling.
Even IF the character was a warrior who sometimes used Fireball (which that is not what a Bladesinger is, that's closer to a Sorcadin), why would a warrior willingly fight in melee combat if they have ample opportunity to use their magic?
You should be creating situations to deal with this. Hell, just make them have several encounters in a row and only give short rests, to force him into conserving his spell slots. You're complaining about fireball spam as if that's not an issue with wizards as a whole: DMs have to take steps to craft meaningful and tough battles over time or wizards can just spam Fireball and long rest every session.

As an aside, not all magical items are swords. Hand out cursed artifacts, give cloaks and amulets and rings. Frankly, you don't have to give the guy anything at all.
Next time read up on a character class beforehand if you'll be this unwilling to adapt to an unexpected playstyle.

>>96174579
3.5 had gestalt rules you could steal but it’s more like having the best of both classes. So are full casters plus a martial class. You could plan around it and make the encounters tougher. https://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/gestaltCharacters.htm

>>96174579
Artificer literally is a half caster. What are you on about?

r8 the two parties running my campaign

Wrathion's visage form and voice so unbearably sexy is a decent consolation prize for all this Ny'alotha.

>>96175194
Obvious slop/10

>>96175194
>only 1 non-ai portrait and its a BG3 screenshot (not sure about the tiefling on bottom row)
Absolutly soulless
I wager that the sunglasses dwarf on top and the blond knight on bottom row are the most fun character in the campaign. Can't infer much on the parties in general anon

>>96174537
The only ones in that group I disagree with are drunken master and battle master. Otherwise, it's stupid to just move one to one without the necessary adjustment and tuning to account, especially if you're going to keep subclasses.

>>96175194
Just by the token choice, the slop party on the bottom looks more fun.

>>96175194
i'm not a miracle worker, but I did my best.

>>96175647
The only thing to disagree with on battlemaster is it being only rolled into fighter, instead of all martials.

>Cleric, I think we need to kill this guy.
>My God.

>>96175926
The sad part is the DNA of the Battlemaster comes from the Bo9S but was rejected for being spellcasting for martials.

Honestly, they should have really invested in the fighting styles making them more comprehensive and putting manuevers into them that would make sense for it and into the weapons .

If I had my way about things, I would completely retool Battlemaster as the new Warlord/Legendary Leader reinforce the role I feel the Fighter should always have which is being the front guy of every battle.

What are some good websites or image boards i can go to to look for roman or Phoenician inspired character designs? I thought there was usually a thread on /tg with character art dumps but I can't find one currently

>>96176240
isn't that what purple dragon knight tried to do?

>>96176240
Warlord is a bard btw, like a swords or valour bard.

>>96176417
No it’s not. I’m not going to argue this retarded line of thinking again. Bards are mages and musicians, warlords are martials and warriors. It’s like saying clerics are warlords.

>>96176716
Which is why I suggested the swords/valour which dip into the warrior-support theme that the warlord fits into?

Caught up on all my podcasts and looking to fill the void between new episodes with an Actual-Play. Any good recommendations. I've played DnD for 15 years or so and never actually tried listening in on others. I fired up CR for the first time the other day on my hunt for an Actual-Play and legitimately the DM and PC's are talking about dikes, trannys, and their PCs being They/Them's so...yeah anything not completely fucking cringe would be a bonus here. Plus it felt so scripted, not sure if it's because they do this as a business now or what, but didn't feel like a real table.

>>96176773
The current conception of bard is absolute shit. I would keep Valor but completely retool it. It's not a commander or warlord in any regard and should probably be more like the hypeman. The one who carries the battle flag while also carrying a sword or gun or whatever.