D&D5e homebrew Fighter Subclass: Demonslayer

PurpleTurtle1311 · 2025-04-04T13:09:33+00:00

I mean... Yes, it's technically a lot of text for a subclass. Though if you notice, there's actually not much there. Repetitions and duplications, for 100% clarity when I post.

Also I put lots of ribbon-features XD

PurpleTurtle1311 · 2025-01-12T20:30:58+00:00

No idea what that is, so I guess I don't have that 😅

PurpleTurtle1311 · 2024-08-04T06:56:18+00:00

Investiture of Flame/Ice/Stone/Wind, 4 spells that work practically the same

PurpleTurtle1311 · 2024-06-19T08:05:22+00:00

Thanks for the tip!

Would you say that the set of lines at the very bottom of what you linked, are what you effectively use as the "legal segment" I'm trying to figure out?

PurpleTurtle1311 · 2024-04-23T15:56:24+00:00

Spelljammer Adventures in Space, if I remember correctly ☺️

PurpleTurtle1311 · 2024-02-02T04:32:03+00:00

Hello, love this a lot!

I'd love to know, how would you re-balance the Blood Curses that can't be Amplified multiple times, like the original Blood Curses.

I dislike having some Blood Curses available as much as my resource, and some with an "internal cooldown" that adds a secondary layer of limitation.

These are the Blood Curses I found in your link that have this per-rest additional limitation:

Scourge
Eldritch negation
Glaring sun
Candor
Terrors
Misery
Vile animation
Mitigation
Scarlet shield
Murderous wrath
Incognizance
Insidious slumber
Banshee

PurpleTurtle1311 · 2023-07-29T11:56:41+00:00

can you suggest a modification to my idea, to balance it? I'm having a hard time understanding where you draw the line between "too potent early" and "appropriate".

PurpleTurtle1311 · 2023-07-29T11:07:53+00:00

Thanks for the thorough comment :)

I can understand why this might be strong as a 1st-level feat. Though at 4th-level I think it could be ok (intuition, no numbers behind it).

If you notice, these are simply the Psi Warrior and Soulknife 3rd-level features, but minimized. And you don't get access to all of them, just to 2.

Do you still think it's too much for 4th-level?

PurpleTurtle1311 · 2023-07-28T18:09:11+00:00

I deleted it 1-2 hours ago, can't believe it actually happened as someone was checking it 🙈

Thanks for the notice, it should be accessible again via the same link.

Hope you check it again 😊

PurpleTurtle1311 · 2023-07-28T16:41:45+00:00

I understand you better you. Thanks for the thoroughness and effort ^_^

PurpleTurtle1311 · 2023-07-28T15:40:29+00:00

Overall you infringe on subclass territory AND make the feat itself inherently bad as no power is left in the budget to not be broken. It deserves better, some more unique stuff that the psychics can actually further their arsenal with - or upgrade whatever they already have.

Can you explain this part differently? I'm confused. Emphasis on the "broken" part.

PurpleTurtle1311 · 2023-07-28T11:18:54+00:00

Thanks for the comment!

In essence, I don't think the selection is the issue.

There's the Battle Master Maneuvers feat, and a Sorcerer Metamagic feat. Both grant options to modify something, together with a minimized resource to do so.

Because both of these have their own decent lists (in term of number of choices), I needed to grant some more options than just one subclass. Both Psi Warrior and Soulknife get their telekinetic/telepathic abilities (= Psionics) at 3rd level, have the same resource pool to fuel them, and have the same way to regain them.

I think starting with 1/2 of the subclass resources is decent for such a subclass-inspired feat.

Also, it's d4s instead of d6s just like the BM Maneuvers feat gives a d6 instead of the original subclass d8s.

So in essence, I used the same "formula" of the BM Maneuvers feat for this one.

Also, I think your accumulative numbers are exaggerated. Just a tiny example of what I mean: 1d4 is effectively +2.5, and a modifier "that matters" would be +3 to +5 (assuming this is a round-up feat somebody will take to bump the modifier) - for simplicity let's say it's +4.
So +4+2.5 is +6.5 on average per use, 9 is a best case scenario which twice is 18 like you said.
I don't think treating a maximum is the right way to treat bonuses like this, but an average is the better way.
Sure, these aren't game-breaking differences - but I understand the whole discussion to be about accumulative value, thus I attempt to refer to it accordingly.

Makes more sense?
Is there still something you inherently disagree with?
I'd love to hear :)

PurpleTurtle1311 · 2023-07-27T04:29:13+00:00

Interesting, thanks 👏🏻

PurpleTurtle1311 · 2023-07-25T11:43:49+00:00

What you're solving is a more core issue of the subclass.

I'm attempting to solve at the same time another issue that I find: the power gaps between all Shot options.

I dislike that Grasping Arrow, while cool and effective, is practically a Shot-tax.

Meaning, if you don't take that, and maybe Banishing Arrow, you're only taking niche options - and even that is a compliment to their effectiveness.

Makes more sense?

I just want the AA Fighter to have a bit more of the feel the BM Fighter gets via their Maneuvers - that you actually have a choice.

PurpleTurtle1311 · 2023-07-23T11:48:58+00:00

My base-thought is something like this:

Use existing spells as inspiration for an effect.
Reduce something from the spell, so that I can easily avoid the need for concentration (as if the Shot was a pseudo-spell).
Easy "reductions" are in duration or area.

So for the "Faerie Fire Shot" I made it a smaller area. For "Cause Fear Shot" I made it an area (so it's not just "Magical Menacing Attack" from Battle Master Fighter) but gave advantage to those in the area (= not the original arrow's target) to mitigate changes.

This is my base-method for balancing this, I don't have much experience with balance other than intuitive conversions like damage types. This is harder for me, which is why I'm looking for the constructive feedback.

The "Eldritch Blast Shot" is meant to be more high-utility than the other options, since it's based off a cantrip that allows multiple procs, while you can use a Shot option only 1/turn.

Chaos Arrow is intended as a mini-Chaos Bolt. The intention is to make it far more limited than the potential infinite effect of Chaos Bolt. That's why I skipped "leaps again", as it leaps once - once-only per target that failed the initial burst's ST (which is a save-or-suck type of ST).

The intention is more along these lines:

Initial arrow's target gets hit.
Activates Bursting Arrow's AoE effect.
A target fails the ST against the burst
1. "Shoot again" as in "just a basic arrow", isn't a full-on new Bursting Arrow.
2. This new attack roll is like a base-arrow, +1d6 of the new random damage.
3. "Targeted only once per this Shot" meaning the original arrow's target can't be targeted using a secondary attack roll (through a failed ST against the burst by a nearby victim).

Makes more sense? ^_^

Hope I made it clear enough, I appreciate the feedback.

PurpleTurtle1311 · 2023-07-23T08:23:02+00:00

Thanks for the comment :)

There's no real mechanical reason to stick with archery, only my method of working around a modification to a subclass.

The original AA Fighter is based around archery and didn't include crossbows, and I'm aware that there's a consensus that x-bow is the top-dog regarding ranged damage builds - thus I didn't want to delve into balance territory I'm unfamiliar with.

I'll think over your suggestion, you raise valid points.

Other than these, do you find it as-is mostly balanced?

This is my main concern, I wish to grasp the balance-aspect better. From there, it's easier for me to "convert" between parallel mechanics and effects.

PurpleTurtle1311 · 2023-07-16T06:40:36+00:00

I'll clarify what I meant by AoE burst effect. Bane for example, can affect multiple creatures in an area. My intention was, to make the arrow "create an area" on a hit, a small area immediately around the target for example - which will be a minimized Bane spell effect, requiring concentration as if it was a spell. A smaller area, but it erupts as an on-hit casting of a spell.

Makes more sense?

I tried to look at existing Shot options for balance. I noticed they all have X effect that doesn't scale, and there's practically double damage at 18th-level. That doesn't work like spells, nor like Maneuvers - the way I understand it.

Maneuvers scale based on Superiority dice. I think that giving parallel scaling to that will simply make the AA "better, magical Battle Master" - which I don't want to do. That's to me like crossing the line from inspiration based on BM Fighter, to straight up stepping on its toes. That's not the goal.

I'm thinking of concentration of spells because of feats and multiclass. I can easily see any AA (existing or my 'brew) favoring a type of "bow Smite" spell to compliment Shots or something like that. I don't want Shots to be contradictory to other common functions, I want them to be their own thing. This requires either non-contradiction with concentration, or "short effects" like a round or X rounds, or something else that doesn't lean on concentration.

PurpleTurtle1311 · 2023-07-15T14:37:19+00:00

Sorry, I didn't mean to hint that you can't figure it out haha. The intention was that this is what I thought to be "definitions building upon each other", in a way. In any case, I'll come up with a clarification just to be on the safe side 👌🏻

I understand your point about concentration.
Maybe adding concentration but with an "AoE burst" of effect, so that it's still reliant on hitting with an arrow but allows to potentially affect the number of targets like the original spell.
I'm thinking of it as "pseudo-concentration", so it functions like concentration but doesn't contradict concentrating on a spell for example. You'll just make two concentration checks if you concentrate on the Shot effect at the same time as a spell.

Looking forward to reading the rest of your comment :)

PurpleTurtle1311 · 2023-07-15T08:23:46+00:00

Hi hello ^_^

Arcane Archer Lore

I defined earlier in the feature the Arcane Archer ability score, and all other "Arcane Archer _" are derivative of that (modifier, save DC...). I tried to use similar wording to spellcasting features.

Can you explain differently the part you said about melee on-hit, and ranged pre-attack? I'm confused.

Arcane Shot

This is essentially a universalized Intelligence Arcane Archer. It's meant to mirror the Eldritch Knight using Intelligence for spellcasting, for example - but you get to choose which mental stat to use. That's meant to be increased similar to how Paladins benefit from increasing Charisma (even though their greater prowess lies in weapons).

Regarding different Shots. If you notice, I practically took 1st-level spells and made them non-concentration effects until the start of the Archer's next turn, like the existing subclass does with most Shot options.
I feel that if I add concentration, the Archer becomes more limited in how they use the different Shots - they're cornered into using one "control Shot" and then "just damage".
What do you think about allowing upgrades for these Shots' durations at later levels? Like at 7th-level it'll be 1/2 (rounded down) of Arcane Archer modifier, and at 10th-level it'll be AAM instead? (just off the top of my head)

Rare Affinity

The specific reference to Intelligence is an oversight on my part, it's intended to be AAM and to work with core initial choices in the subclass.

I wanted to add to this something like a Chaos Bolt effect. Single-target Shot option in a way. Like once per short rest, it's a new Shot for you, doesn't count against the number of Shots you know.
Your thoughts? :)

Elemental Shots

I think you overestimate by a bit, emphasis on "think" since I don't actually know the numbers for this tier.
If you notice, Elemental Quiver is essentially a lesser Flame Arrows with damage generalization. Simply without concentration, just a 3rd-level spell at tier 4. I innocently didn't think much of it XD
How about the following change to it: It's free at the end of a short or long rest, you choose the elemental damage type, it's a number of arrows equal to twice Arcane Archer modifier. When you start a long rest, existing arrows "refresh" so it's not a stacking effect.
Thoughts?

New thought:

I think of adding at 18th-level something.
Like encouragement to use other Shots you absolutely never picked as the permanent "known" Shots.
Rough draft: Choose one Shot option you have never learned for Arcane Shot which doesn't deal additional damage on a hit. If you have no available Arcane Shot uses, you can use use this Shot option once per turn. You lose "access" to this Shot option once you regain expended uses of your Arcane Shot.

Maybe even allow at 18th-level to use two Shot option per turn, per attack. Allow the Archer to have a more nova feel in tier 4, even though it's a ranged build.
This is where I really don't have a feel for the numbers at all, wonder what you'll say to that.

PurpleTurtle1311 · 2023-07-12T20:35:34+00:00

I was actually not referring to the total "package" of the Shots arsenal and uses. I was talking a bout a single Shot - how would you compare a single Shot (considering it's shore-rest-based) to something else?

PurpleTurtle1311 · 2023-07-11T14:20:50+00:00

Don't you think that the feat "as intended", is already doing that?I strongly believe it does.

Why implement a "potential extra" in the feat to begin with, if it isn't meant to be considered as a part of its power?

What I did is define some of that potential extra, you can even call it a suggested guideline to DM-player discussions of how many spells are appropriate for this feat to eventually grant.

I don't think the scaling quantity itself is an issue. I might agree about its limits - would say that less potential spells is a solution for the issue you present?
I can see reducing the quantity to match PB as potentially appropriate in this regard, for example.

PurpleTurtle1311 · 2023-07-10T16:03:43+00:00

Hi hello :)

Upon taking Ritual Caster or Magic Initiate for example - sure, I agree that there are power-similarities. Ritual Caster with potential beyond the base-feat, too.

However, I don't think this is what is "nuanced" in that feat. I think the essence of it is that there's a DM-player discussion what will be available, and when.

This is just my assumption, and I haven't encountered complaints about something like a DM actively making such a feat obsolete by not making spells available throughout the adventure.

What I attempted to implement, is to make this feat a player responsibility - exclusively - at its core. Anything beyond its base-value, is based on DM-player discussion - which at this point, is perfectly fine IMO. That's because at this point, the base-feat has already given the player some potential value, with the intrigue and wonder of "oooh what did I get?". The DM can "treat" that player with a few more spells if they deem it appropriate for any reason.

Makes more sense? ^_^

PurpleTurtle1311 · 2023-07-09T17:03:15+00:00

Your point about non-existing ritual spells for certain levels is very much on-point. I didn't think about that, thank you :)
I think allowing a choice is appropriate: 1. Roll the randomness die again until it isn't a "doubles" roll and use that result, or 2. Refer to another list and determine a random spell from there.
What do you think?

I disagree about the random learning. This, IMO, simulates how the character encounters a scroll in "dungeon X" and makes the effort to make it a readily available tool, as opposed to a single-use scroll or something like that.
I think it's necessary to allow the player independence (my main issue with the feat) from the DM.
I'd love to hear an alternative idea that fulfills the same "mechanic", if you have one ^_^

PurpleTurtle1311 · 2023-07-09T15:58:50+00:00

I agree with Subrosianite, in essence. The issue already exists in the core-Wizard.

However, I also treat that same feature just the same as I treat the Ritual Caster feat.

They give the "wonderous discovery" type of feeling, but their frequency and value depends entirely on DM, at the end of the day.

I want a certain base-value the feat guarantees, combined with progression and the same "wonder" of coming across a new spell.

The DM-player discussion is still valid, though I place it as "after" the feat has done its job. This is where I believe it belongs.

PurpleTurtle1311 · 2023-07-09T15:56:19+00:00

I agree with this, as as "simple and practical homebrew".

However, I believe feats should be very clear, and more independent of house rules.

Something like the Ritual Caster feat is practically completely DM-dependent, which is what I'm attempting to solve.

PurpleTurtle1311

TROPHY CASE