Tag Info

New answers tagged

3

The question I would ask myself is, "Does it add anything to my game to have additional complexity here?" In my game, whenever someone wants to do anything to a lock - lock, unlock, jam it, etc., I see no reason why I should make things more complicated than an Open Locks roll against the lock's standard DC. (Though in the jamming it case, obviously if the ...


0

Baseline: DC of the lock. Add modifiers where appropriate, e.g.: Padlock that needs to be held closed while picking: +5 In the dark: +0 From inside chest (very awkward): +10-+20 Big troll pushing on the other side of the door: +5 for stress, +a lot if no one else is keeping the door closed etc.


5

First, I want to point out that flying characters already had this option at the cost of a single feat, Flyby Attack. Flyby Attack is different from Spring Attack in that it allows any standard action during movement, which is massively more valuable. So this would eliminate the point of a few feats, like Flyby Attack and Spring Attack. But I have played in ...


6

Balance So firstly, you need to understand that you're effectively stealing a class feature. Wizards get the least class features of any class, because their access to a wide variety of spells makes up for it. With that said, balance-wise, this is not going to be an issue. Necromancy spells come in 3 broad categories: Offensive, resurrection, and minions. ...


10

Adding necromancy spells isn't overpowered in and of itself. If I were you or your DM, I'd write a new terrain type for Land druids or perhaps even make entirely new paradigm for the class. Considering that you are inexperienced, however, I think the easiest thing and the one for the least potential to break your game is to make a new circle for Land ...


7

Are they just putting together things you already understand well? For example, suppose they have a bomb from the Dungeon Master’s Guide, and they want to launch it via bow and arrow for extra range. Just let them do it. If you think it’s a cool idea with no real drawbacks, just use an ordinary bow attack with bomb damage. If you think it would be difficult ...


2

I think SevenSidedDie's response covers the basics pretty well. On the specific question asked, if I where the GM, my ruling for this action would be (I am considering L1-4 characters): Make an Intelligence ability check DC 13 during a short rest. Spend 2d6 G worth of materials. On a success, creates 1 explosive arrow. It must be fired within 1 day or ...


4

You don't need homebrew for this, because 5e already accounts for using ability scores for things that aren't explicitly covered in the non-exhaustive list of skills (appropriately enough, this is first touched on in the "Using Ability Scores" section of the Player's Basic Rules, where each ability non-exhaustively lists examples of Other X Checks that the ...


2

The racial HD / level adjustment scheme never worked. Kludge fixes like savage progressions only smoothed out the pain, didn’t really fix it. I suggest that you attempt to make lycanthropy power-neutral, so that it can be applied to players without making things too problematic. Here’s my suggestion: Afflicted Lycanthropy Afflicted ...


4

Racial Levels Frank and K's Tome of Tiamat was to include something appropriate for your needs, but it was never finished. However, you can take some inspiration from their forums, which offer a paradigm similar to the Savage Progressions offered by Sean K Reynolds. There is also the article/forum post "Improved monster classes: adapting creatures for ...


3

Try Savage Progressions This is pretty much precisely the use case of the Savage Progressions articles. They still have some of the problems of templates (particularly at high levels), but they allow players to slowly add abilities as they level up. You don't have to worry about a giant 9 LA jump. Otherwise, see below... Doing away with the racial hit ...



Top 50 recent answers are included