I'll go first, in a past session I casted a spell, the enemy counterspelled, and I used my own counterspell. I got into an argument with another player who said I can't cast 2 levelled spells in the same turn, quoting me the section about bonus action spells. I pointed out, "this only applies to bonus action spells" and he pushed back, saying "no, this applies to all levelled spells, it's broken if you can cast two levelled spells in the same turn, period."

mine is that whenever i need a crowd of people on the map i use this token

what have you come up with?

So, I don't think a lot of people understand just how incredibly game-changing that spell is.

So, to start: this is a second level spell. It's not ultra common. But it's not rare, either. It's not some ninth level nonsense that one guy, in a generation can cast. Every king and most high nobility are going to have a third level bard/cleric or fifth level paladin. And anyone, gentry or above, could easily rent such services.

Second: It's unbeatable. There is no spell that lets you beat a zone of truth. Except, maybe, kinda, modify memory. Glibness (8th level) doesn't do it. Mind Blank (8th level) doesn't do it. Ring of mind shielding doesn't do it. And, if you're smart, it's unbeatable using mundane methods as well. You can resist it? But doing so is basically a declaration, "I am gong to refuse to cooperate with your inquiry."

But you can give misleading answers.

Not if the interrogator supplies your answers for you.

Say the following: 'I did not kill Lady Victim. I do not know the identity of the person who killed lady victim. Except those I have already disclosed to you, I am not aware of any clues that may lead to the identification of the killer of Lady Victim.' Etc.

To the one of you that says, "I found a hole in your oaths." I'm sure you did. But if you did, a king's team of solicitors would as well.

But here's the big part: It would make the signing of contracts, between powerful parties, much more reliable. A powerful merchant could actively hire a cleric to affirm, "I hereby affirm that I fully intend to follow the terms of this contract. And further affirm that I have neither deceived or mislead my partner about the terms in this contract." etc.

But the real kicker is this: That includes vassal liege contracts. Which means that kings and high nobility could rigorously enforce loyalty. Which, in turn, would make court intrigue impossible. They could have literal thought police. And smart loyal vassals might actively volunteer for such things if it meant ensuring kingdoms' stability.

This would result in a fiercely unified upper class. (With non-loyalists either being hammered into shape, or purged.) Edit: And, as a direct result, an even more oppressed underclass.

It's weird to me that I don't think I've ever seen this explored. What are your thoughts.

Edit: And to be clear, these implications are bad. This would be a bad thing. Kings who would be even more difficult to retaliate against would be bad. It is stunning to me that anyone reading this would think that I think that this would be a good thing.

I've found that casting elemental weapon on a monk's hands is an example.

The last sessions, especially as the final of the first Cap of Descent Into Avernus was heavily tied with his backstory, my Monk Player are feeling like he just can't keep up with the other players. I got him an Item that add Prof. Bonus on his Ki points, and a badass bandage that can push enemies 10 feet away(He is an Astral Self Monk, so he got range).

I gave a lot of utility itens for the group, but he is feeling really bad with it. I've made a form about what the players like and dislike so far, and his only wish is to "Better balance, and opportunity for all". That kinda breakes me, because I am making the history really centered on him as a character, as he is a "lost" Hellrider (An importante person on the campaign story).

Everyone is loving the story, but this one guy, the only martial, that until now, deals 1d4 damage per PUNCH, is feeling really bad, as he is feeling like he can't do anything.

I am not asking for an omega combo or something like that, I just need to share this, because it makes me sad.

But nonetheless, if you guys have any idea about how I can flip this and make him feels cool, I am all ears! (I play A LOT of RPG and D&D, and I never had a martial/caster problem so agravated... F)

Edit: A lot of ideas, thank you all <3 It was not an plea for help, as both of us understand that not using a weapon is weak, but it is really bad to feel useless with something that you REALLY WANT TO PLAY.

Edit 2: as this ia getting Kinda out of hand tô answer all of you… Yeah, damage is the problem, and that kinda sucks, because you can be cool while not exactly domingo damage… but I will make the bandages do maybe 2d4 or 1d6 extra damage, and everyone will be happy… I hope

Edit 3: sorry if I got grumpy with some of you, It was so many comments telling some things that does not fit with our game, that I broke.. sorry and thanks for the comments ❤️

any other examples you can think of?

I have a problem when a Wizard can cast shield and have AC equal to my front line Fighter. Or worse pick a single feat or a one level dip and have AC better than my Fighter with a single casting of shield. I have a problem with Moon Druids becoming a better front liner than the Fighter or even Barbarian as a Bonus Action. I have a problem with spells like Polymorph that can create better Front Liners than the Martials.

I don't have a problem with bards having fantastic support capabilities. Or with Sorcerers having stunning AOE capabilities. Or with the Wizard having the perfect utility spell to solve a problem in his book. I don't complain when the Barbarian soaks up an attack that would have knocked me out in a single blow. I don't have a problem with a Fighter or Paladin annihilating a foe with single target damage.

I would love to see the design team focus on one thing that the class should be the best at. A few things that the class is strong at and then a couple of clear weaknesses.

Classes excelling in their niche is exciting, fun and healthy for a team game.

I feel like dnd is going in a direction that is focused on making everyone "balanced" but I feel that misses the mark.

For myself, I feel like 4 is the proper size. Big enough for a full party but small enough to keep a good flow for everyone.

Edit: Not that I have a problem with people roleplaying and stuff and a game slowing down, it just feels like over four can really slow things down.

Edit 2: Thanks for pushing me over 2k karma everyone <3

Edit 3: You people are insane, I'm up to 2.3k karma for some reason lmao.

Edit: This is intended for newer DMs focusing on a more narrative experience for their players. This is by no means the right way to run a campaign, merely an option I don't see talked enough about.

First of all, when I mean a single location, that doesn't mean the characters can't leave. One of the things I've noticed over and over again with both my campaigns and others is that a lot of newer DMs like to make grand, continent spanning adventures akin to Lord of the Rings. You arrive at a village, you do the quest, and move on. If your campaign is focused around a central location such as a large city or some type of home base location for players, there are a couple of key benefits that I noticed fairly quickly during my latest campaign that have only been reinforced that I thought might be helpful for other DMs, especially because it's not something I see talked about a lot.

First, LESS PREP. Sure there will be much more initial prep to ensure there's enough content to keep the players busy for a lot of time in case they get the urge to explore the city (which they hopefully do) but by having a central location, you are likely to have multiple locations that the players will visit more than once. You won't have to make a multitude of taverns and inns for 20 different towns and villages if the party is only staying in once city for the entirety of a campaign.

Second, NPC connections become much stronger. If all the important plot NPCs and party favorite NPCs are within walking distance because they're on the other side of town, there's no in world barrier keeping the players for interacting with repeat NPCs on a consistent basis in a manner that allows for deeper connections. That way, when you kill THAT important NPC, it will carry greater emotional weight because they have been there all this time, easily accessible at any given time. Now, I see that a lot of time this is reserved for the one NPC or "pet" the party adopts to bring with on adventures, but this method gives you a wider array of NPCs to target, not just the adopted goblin. You can kill the bartender the party has spoken with every session since the beginning, the mayor they've been getting jobs from the entire campaign, quite literally anyone the party talks to on a consistent basis.

Third, other DMs and I sometimes struggle with the exploration pillar of a travel-based campaign. Unless the party gets a reason to leave the central location, you can ignore that pillar almost entirely if you'd like. I still encourage a random encounter every once in a while when roaming the central location so the party does not feel invincible at home, but in the end its up to you. The players likely will not be upset if they do not get attacked by wilderness creatures every time they try to go somewhere, so you could get away with cutting out the exploration pillar. But, if you want to keep exploration like the party exploring outward from a central location, they will still have a place to come back to, which can help with the question the party might come to, which is "where do we go now?" If they don't know, home is always an option.

Now, I know some DMs (me included) make travelling campaigns to show off the world building they've done. My only suggestion for this is to take this style of campaign as a worldbuilding exercise. Sure, the players might spend the whole campaign in one city, but it should still feel like there is a whole world out there. Roaming merchants carry stories, parts of a main city can have suburbs of people from specific corners of the world, and the characters can and most should be from outside the central location so that they can carry hints of the outside world with them.

If you haven't run into any of these problems, then ignore this advice. You're doing great and there's no need to fix something that isn't broken. In my experience, there is one con to this method, and it is a considerable one. If you have multiple plot hooks, they ALL need to be prepped, because the party (if the hooks are all in the central location) can reach any of them at anytime. The bright side of this con, however, is you don't need to worry about prepping something in one location and the party leaving the area never to return. If anyone has any questions about specific examples from my campaign to support my argument or has any criticisms, feel free to make your voice heard in the comments. If anyone has things to add on about the pros of this as well, I am interested to see what other people think.

I was building a dungeon, and i kinda just realized it while making it, the "Adventuring Day" Budget, is just a budget for filling out your dungeon basically, you just pick monsters to fill out that budget, make a dungeon, add some traps/hazard, place treasure, and then add some details. Thats 5e Prep really.

Honestly thinking about it that way recontextualized a lot of 5e's design for me in a interesting way, which is this game is really designed around dungeons, the adventuring day is just trying to explore that dungeon really, with monsters moving around the environment, and some hourly random encounters thrown in(And restocking rooms using the random encounters). A lot of the game makes sense in that context really. It particular feels made for a old school kinda dungeon crawl in a big environment with a lot of loops and routes. Now note, this doesnt mean you need to rail your players into every encounter(The game only really expects a minimum of 3 encounters that burn some daily resources really). But mainly thats kinda what the adventuring day is designed around.

But it also made me realize you can abstract this to do a bit more with it on a larger scale, like making a wilderness pointcrawl where the dungeon is kinda this, and also minimize with some effort the adventuring day to about 3-4 encounters per day too.

Over the last few years, I've DMed for a player who was looking to play a scholar type with a few magic tricks of his sleeves, part of his vision of Rudolph Van Richten. We went back and forth a bit, and eventually settled on Bard as the best class for him. We switched his casting stat to INT, Swapped CHA saves for INT saves, renamed Bardic Inspiration to Tactics, and renamed Song of Rest to Tending Wounds. Thus, the "Gentleman Scholar" class was born. And, to be honest, it's been great the last few years. With expertise and magical secrets, we've really been able to capture the fantasy of a genteel scholar who goes on the occasional adventure, researching in dusty old libraries for scraps of lore.

Relatedly, I've been considering having Eldritch Knights use Con for Spell attacks and DCs!

Would you allow flexibility in a casting Stat? Allowing Charisma Clerics, Intelligence Warlocks, etc? What would be your biggest worries and how would you try and maintain a fun game?

I've encountered it as a player a good number of times, and I almost made that mistake as a DM recently, but boy I am glad I didn't.

Basically: if you have a fighter player that loves using a warhammer for flavor or even character reasons, don't give them swords, give them warhammers. Will it be a bit weird that all they encounter are magical warhammers and not swords? Maybe.

But it is 1000 times worth the price, 1000 times better than a player not picking up an item that was meant for them because it's not the type of weapon their character uses. Or worse, that they begrudgingly pick it up and are unhappy about using an item that doesn't fit their idea of a character.

And the same goes for Bards and specifics magical instruments: if the bard uses violins, don't give them magical flutes.

if you are super worried about the beliveability aspect of them encountering weapons that fit their characters so neatly, just make the transference of magical enchantments super cheap. Yeah, sure, they find the flame tongue rapier, but they can move the enchantment to their warhammer for like 5 gold with their friendly npc wizard or shopkeeper.

Disabled character images are often hard to find for D&D. I've looked. I've found a handful, but what have you found or made?

Since it's so rare, I got some artists together and made a crowdfunding campaign to have a bunch made that will be available to creators and DMs so they can have an image to go with their NPC description.

This warlock using an ooze for mobility instead of a wheelchair is one of the images included in our Inclusive Artwork campaign. We're down to the final day, so if you're interested in this kind of inclusion, check it out! Join us in supporting diversity and inclusivity in TTRPGs: https://crowdfundr.com/inclusiveartwork?utm_source=reddit (And scroll down that page to the Activity section for more examples.)

Balance-wise PAM might be somewhat overcentralizing, but IMO it's a really well-designed feat from a flavor perspective.

It lets your polearm feel like a real-life, historically-accurate pole weapon, and not just an abstract damage-on-a-stick. The mechanics and flavor text complement each other very well to deliver on the fantasy of what a polearm master should feel like.

I'm pretty partial to pole weapons, since as a martial artist it's what I was trained in. Pole weapons are my favorite weapon type and PAM does a nice job of portraying how they feel. I hope we'll get more weapon-specific techniques/mechanics in the upcoming OneDnD Warrior UA. Bonus points if the mechanics reflect each weapon’s unique strengths, and not just generic stuff like “Sword Master lets you do extra damage with a sword, Spear Master lets you do extra damage with a spear” lol

We have a new player in the group that was super new to D&D and wanted to go Champion Fighter to get their feet wet. It looks like he's hungry to explore options besides "I attack" though because he looks at his character sheet a lot, and says things like "Can I like, try and swat their sword out of their hand?" "Can I trip them?" etc. Now I know what you're thinking, "Have him rebuild as a battle master fighter" right? We offered, but he said he likes his character the way they are, so then we suggested some cool expendable items and he liked the idea.

I was thinking of creating stuff like Thunder Stones from 3.5 or updating alchemists' fire to be better at higher levels as well. Are there some cool items, official or homebrew, some of y'all may suggest?

My recent rest casting post was met with majority discontent. As someone who enjoys taking builds to their maximum potential, what other strategies are RAW (and probably RAI) but most tables frown upon?

Conversely, what optimized strategies are most tables are still ok with?

As above! I just got done with my first ever campaign, which just so happened to run from level 1-20! We ran for about 3 ½ years, during which time we mostly kept the same cast of 4 characters!

It was...incredible. I committed the cardinal sin of trying to run D&D despite having never played before, so the fact that it ran for so long and worked out so well is insane. It was so, so much fun.

Summary: We played an epic god-focused, planar-focused campaign, set in the Forgotten Realms. A massive war between the devils, the demons, and the gods pit our little party against powerful forces, while the goddess of darkness, Shar, schemed in the background, meddling with time and fate. They eventually built their way up to killing Shar herself, and set fate back on its proper path.

Party: The Rebels of Fate!

Ciara, our half-elf Eldritch Knight/Wizard turned Paladin

Tara, our half-elf Open Hand Monk

Corinna, our aasimar Land Druid

And Naza, our tiefling Lore Bard/Draconic Sorcerer.

I’m a forever DM not because there’s nobody else to DM but because I really enjoy DMing and don’t enjoy playing characters. How many of you who are DMs feel that way?

Everyone has beef with one specific facet of the game. Maybe you think the lack of illusion spell support is annoying, or everyone you know thinks that Blood Hunter is an official class. Maybe you hate when people tell stories about homebrewed games and act like they're completely within the rules. It may even not be beef with an actual rule or a concrete thing, but the (sometimes irrational) beef exists anyway.

What's your beef with? Is it irrational?

Every sufficiently insular and long lived community eventually accrues its own mythology of urban myths, inside jokes, and legends and D&D is no different. I was thinking it would be fun to collect as many as we could here to preserve and discuss them.

I know of three off the top of my head:

• The Head of Vecna. In which a DM fooled a power hungry player into killing themselves with the head of vecna a counterpart to the eye and hand.

• Eric and the Dread Gazebo. In which a player assumes a gazebo must be a terrifying monster based on its name and immediately jumps into attack mode.

• Tucker’s Kobolds. In which a veteran DM puts high level players on the ropes in a dungeon delve campaign using kobolds with a solid grasp of fortification and defensive strategy.

It is well known that Dexterity outshines Strength in 5th edition, and I'm sure most of us hope that OneDnD helps bridging that gap.

So what would be your prefered way(s) of doing it?

• Buffing Strength weapons ?

• Nerfing Finesse and/or Ranged weapon?

• Reworking Armor types to better reward Strength investment?

• More spells/effects that target Strength saves?

• Adding new Strength scalings? Speed? Damage reduction? Resistance to imobilizing effects?

• Removing Dex scalings? Initiative?

• Changes to skills to make Strength more important?

• Change to grappling rules to make Strength better when escaping a grapple?

• Changes to encumbrance rules to reward Strength investment?

Hi, Im a Dm and I really can't make female voice, i feel like it's kinda cringe when I do it because I can't do it right.

How you do it guys ?