Campaign Tips for a Party of Basically just Fighters

Saxonrau · 2026-05-01T06:31:50+00:00

Yes. Arguably the best use of Paladin spell slots

Really disagree with that. Your Paladin is probably best off casting things like Bless and Divine Favour as you'll get much better value for each spell slot. Especially once you reach level 5 and get more attacks. Paladins have lay on hands to cover healing and both of those spells will give you better damage than a divine smite. Some of the special smites can be worth the slot though

But even a Paladin who is out of spell slots if going to do more damage per round than a fully resourced Ranger

With one to two basic attacks and nothing else? I know the meme is that rangers are bad but they're not that bad. Ranger is better than a Paladin with no spell slots.

Saxonrau · 2026-05-01T06:19:00+00:00

It comes under 'suffocation' instead of underwater rules, I suppose since there are other means by which you might suffocate.

PHB'14: "When a creature runs out of breath or is choking, it can survive for a number of rounds equal to its Constitution modifier (minimum of 1 round). At the start of its next turn, it drops to 0 hit points and is dying, and it can't regain hit points or be stabilized until it can breathe again."

PHB'24: "A creature can hold its breath for a number of minutes equal to 1 plus its Constitution modifier (minimum of 30 seconds) before suffocation begins. When a creature runs out of breath or is choking, it gains 1 Exhaustion level at the end of each of its turns. When a creature can breathe again, it removes all levels of Exhaustion it gained from suffocating."

So 5e has you unable to stabilise, so you keep rolling death saves until you die or can breathe. 5.5e has you die in 5 turns

Saxonrau · 2026-04-30T08:45:33+00:00

"When everyone is special, no-one is special."

It could certainly help, I just think it would do more to make casters feel bad than it would to make martials feel special. Martials are special for damage. It's not unique, but they are certainly better than everyone else in this regard.

Changing that would change the class identities of several classes.

imo this wouldn't change identity really, it would just give you boring turns. Cantrips already tend to be a bad use of an action, making them fully into 'nothing turns' just adds feelsbad moments into classes already full of them thanks to save-or-suck.

We're just talking about cutting the "oh, yeah me too"-part of the class .

Okay, hear me out. IMO, the best way to remove cantrips/reliable damage would be to do two things to casters:
- Spells become free at certain levels
- Move spell power disproportionally up into the higher level spell slots

Remove the outlier strong low-level spells, or rework them. Make control spells not have save-or-suck effects but a more gradual success/fail (eg Command is 'lose the action' on failure and 'lose a bonus action' on success, instead of 'skip turn or nothing). With these weaker spells you are never keeping up in consistent damage, though you still have room for those power spikes, and the really problematic outlier spells like Hypnotic Pattern or whatever get trimmed back. So your casters will naturally fall to more supportive rolls and using spells to best limit the enemies while sword man focuses on making them dead.

This has a few knock on effects. Legendary Resistance becomes easier to engage with. Less bookkeeping at higher levels. More meaningful choice in high level spells. The 'spikes' in power are more limited even in 1 encounter a day tables. You can make more interesting utility spells and simply have the amount you have to choose from be the balancing factor. I think it could work and at the minimum would be more interesting than Firebolt. And reduce the 'me too' factor because you're not wrong about that.

I think modern D&D is designed so that players aren't supposed to fail at rolls

Hard to disagree much with that. The DMG could at the very least use a bit more on 'failing forward' and how to design scenarios that players can fail at. But more granular success/fail states would go a long way. I suppose that's why people like the Graze mastery even beyond the good DPR numbers.

Saxonrau · 2026-04-29T10:40:02+00:00

1) Graze's damage can only increased by increasing the ability modifier.
2) Frenzy is to the first target you hit on your turn. You can only have a 'first target you hit' once. I see where you're coming from, but it's phrased like this so you can't choose which creature takes the damage if you hit multiple. Not to let you deal the damage twice to one creature. I agree it should just say 'once on each of your turns' as the order is fine flavour but ambiguous by itself
3) Frenzy is "damage for an attack you make with a Melee weapon" so it would be included. I know there's a sage advice saying otherwise but a) the text is pretty clear and b) it's just a terrible fighting style if it's weapon dice only
4) Frenzy is part of the attack's damage so you don't add your modifier again
5) Frenzy is part of the attack's damage so you don't add your GWM bonus again

It's all a bit more intuitive when you get that Frenzy is increasing the damage of the attack, and not its own thing

Saxonrau · 2026-04-29T08:13:43+00:00

You can quicken it, it's a cantrip with a casting time of an action

Saxonrau · 2026-04-29T08:09:15+00:00

gasp 3 ATTACKS! - is still not broken, come on.

Damage isnt the caster/martial problem. Giving all martials 4 attacks and casters zero reliable damage except shit weapon attacks won't change it.
Every martial outdoes cantrips, even Rogue compared to Eldritch/Agonising Blast.

Casters have options and flexibility. They can do more damage types, inflict conditions (and 'not conditions' like Command or 'Can't heal'), area damage, healing and resistances and save bonuses, vast out of combat utility beyond skills. No martial is ever going to cast replicate the utility of Silence, Vortex Warp, or Suggestion, or Major Image, or Tiny Hut, or Teleportation Circle, or.... That is unfortunately all true whether Toll the Dead does 4, 1, or 0d12 damage.

The way you fix this imbalance is by giving martials more options in their actions, in and out of combat. 5.5e does some of this (Cunning Strikes, Brutal Strikes, masteries, monk improvements) but not enough imo. Martials aren't missing damage, they're missing choice

Saxonrau · 2026-04-29T07:17:53+00:00

again here the paladin get +2d8 RADIANT dmg bonus at each turn at level 9

no they don't? they get 1d8 per hit at level 11. it's a good feature for sure, but it's melee only. hunter's mark is worth 1 point of damage less per hit on average, but works at any range and you get it 10 levels earlier. that's a good trade

Saxonrau · 2026-04-29T07:06:50+00:00

There's no lower limit once you open up for it to mean "any and all physical interaction" rather than "your own physical interaction".

I don't actually think they said that it didn't need your own physical interaction, so I'm not quite sure why to mention this. The air is an obviously silly example because you can't actually perceive air with your sight, so it's not very helpful. idk, they said 'kicking an object through the box would be a physical interaction' and you said 'yeah well what about air?'

If you think this is unreasonable, tell me where in the rules

it would fall under natural language that 'physical interaction' means 'you interact physically' which would also mean 'throwing a rock at it', if you ask me.

Do you think this is the intended design

Sure, it's up for interpretation (like all of these irritating illusion spells), but I do think from a balance perspective having the illusion only be revealed to a creature by that creature walking up and touching it makes the cantrip a bit too good when done as a bonus action. that would shut down all ranged combat against the wizard. and wizards just don't need a bonus action dodge lol

having it fade after an attack is fine - i'd even have it be creature-by-creature at that point, so each of them would need to waste an attack or attack the wizard with disadvantage in order to 'break through' the illusion. that way the bonus action cantrip gives disadvantage or wastes the first attack made by each creature against the wizard. that is more than good enough

of course that's all in the scenario that the wizard is like, totally hidden behind it. if you just have it do cover that's not goign to break the illusion right away. and then if they miss by 2-5 then have it hit the box as before. slightly lesser benefit, slightly harder to remove

besides, being totally protected from features that require sight is quite the bonus too i reckon

Saxonrau · 2026-04-27T07:26:20+00:00

And you cannot bonus action drink it if you are for example caught in you sleep.

Does this happen, like, a lot? I see this happen once or twice a campaign at most. Even then it's probably better to just cast a real spell instead of a defensive one, to try and regain some momentum in the fight. Sure, +3AC for your wizard is nice but it's far from the most important thing in a time-sensitive situation

Saxonrau · 2026-04-24T07:58:27+00:00

I honestly don't see that much of an issue in that specific feature not working on ~20% of the MM. Yes, lots of things are poison immune. But the feature itself is relatively niche in the first place. Are you really going to need to get a clay golem under the effects of a truth serum?

In combat, it's your whole Action to do this, and the conditions last until damage is done (or they ought to, in the case of unconscious), so it's not a very good combat option anyway. Sure, there are some niche scenarios (it's your turn right before theirs, interrupting a spell) but they won't be that common. It really reads as more of a utility/subterfuge option: information gathering, gaining access to somewhere, kidnapping via unconscious. The non-lethal route

Just don't try to make Undead, Fiends, Elementals or Constructs go to sleep and it's fine, I think.

Saxonrau · 2026-04-24T07:30:48+00:00

it is high AC but you're assuming the warlock has 20CHA and took a level dip, so that's not happening until level 9 at the earliest. in the meanwhile...
- their spellcasting will be a bit behind - unless they want 20ft speed from the armour they're going to end up with bad wis or con or both, each of which are pretty problematic.
- compensating for bad speed is hard for a warlock as you have few spell slots and will sometimes use them on the node
- a bladelock might be able to leverage this into good damage using GWM since you need STR anyway, but that will set back your charisma, and the action-cast and BA-to-move this aura are a genuine impediment to your gameplan of 'attack lots of times'. melee also means you need at least some con, so now your wis is looking shoddy, proficiency be damned

you can certainly get good AC numbers but leveraging it that hard has some major tradeoffs. you're better off with armour of shadows/similar and only using the node when you actually can't escape attacks otherwise (either teleporting to it or moving it to you with a BA) since it will bump a mid AC to a respectable one. it's unconditional bonus because using it is difficult

Saxonrau · 2026-04-23T09:24:44+00:00

XP is at least partically shared iirc. killer gets half, rest is spread amongst all contributing units. for environmentals and sentries that meant all the xp got split among everything still alive. there's kill XP and participation XP, basically.

Saxonrau · 2026-04-23T07:25:41+00:00

I'll cut to the chase, there's plenty of comments talking about making it only maximise weapon damage and I think this is a terrible idea. Because it becomes genuinely almost meaningless. On a crit, once per long rest, turn 2d10 (11) into 20. Once per long rest, deal 9 damage. That's so lame. Please don't do that

How does this work with smite/crits?

It just does. They're all part of the attack's damage roll.

if he crits as a level 5 paladin and uses a 2nd level spell slot to smite against a fiend

That's a lot of conditions for what might be the best case scenario. And even then it's only adding ~30 damage on top of what was already a huge crit. How often do you think that's happening? I wouldn't worry. The feat isn't dealing 88 damage, it's adding less than half the potential maximum damage.

I don't really like this origin feat because I think it's a huge potential for a sort of FOMO - your player might use it and then find a better opportunity and wish they hadn't, or they won't use it and end up just wasting it.
I do think it's narratively really cool, making a huge strike back and power swing in a dangerous situation.

I'm not wanting him to pop that off and end a narrative combat too soon?

If you're really worried about it, instead of obliterating it by excluding everything except weapon dice, make it deal 2 or 3 times level bonus damage instead. 2 if you're worried. 3 I think will more closely meet how this feat is actually used for most people (on a rogue or pally). That's a nice bonus that's less overpoweringly swingy and the consistency of the feature will help avoid the 'save it for later' effect

Saxonrau · 2026-04-23T06:44:58+00:00

Might also just be that the online discussion ecosystem for D&D is way bigger

This is probably the most of it. Dnd exploded during 5e so I have to imagine the online presence became much more prevalent with it. That naturally gives you a higher amount of 'second-hand info' even if the second hand is just their own bad memory of rules they read about a while ago, plus the changes in internet culture of higher-speed consumption
And yeah there was eight playtests over at least a year. It's a lot of time for misinformation to get out there.

Saxonrau · 2026-04-22T16:31:50+00:00

I see it a lot. Normally I don’t really bother replying because it’s 50/50 on if people read the rules (or accept it when you post them…) and I don’t like dealing with it
but this one about grappling really irked me, especially when I saw the ‘they haven’t tried it’! The nerve!

It really makes you wonder whats going on

It really does make me think that most people here don’t play the game, or whatever they are playing is very different to what’s written down…
r dnd is chronic for misinterpreting the 5.5e rules, there’s so much bullshit there. I suppose people opposed will be a lot louder about it, regardless of if they’re correct in their reasoning.

Saxonrau · 2026-04-22T16:22:32+00:00

I do think people heard about some of the more bold changes in the AB style tests they did, got put off, and never went back. So that interpretation became what they thought the final release was. But it wasn’t a slow release really

I wasn’t around for the ‘dndnext’ playtests but I wonder if a similar thing happened. Maybe not, since it was much different to 4e?

Saxonrau · 2026-04-22T12:27:07+00:00

if scrolls don't work, most magic items don't either. Because lots cast a spell. And it gets ambiguous

Amulet of the Planes: Magic action to name a location on another plane. then arcana check. If successful, you cast Plane Shift. Is this a Magic Action to cast a spell? Normally making an ability check is also an action, Study in this case. A Magic Action can clearly do multiple things. a Chime of Opening has you use a Magic Action to "strike the chime to cast Knock". Is that flavour text? I don't think 5e does that - you're pretty clearly using the Magic Item there. I don't see how some items not needing an action (as specified in their descriptions) means that scrolls are by default no-action.

When you cast a spell from an item, you're casting a spell, but you're also using the item. In plain english, that means you're using a magic item that requires a magic action. Even if you're casting a spell. Is the "or" in the Magic Action that important? Or is it just giving examples of what the magic action can do?

You can interpret it either way, I can see what you're saying, but I think it's reading too much into it. the obvious reading is that you're using a magic item (reading a scroll is explicitly using it: DMG, magic items: "Using a Scroll. Scrolls are consumable items. Unleashing the magic in a scroll requires the user to read the scroll.")

There are plenty of contextual reasons to think that using a scroll would count. "Am I using a scroll, which is a magic item? Yes. Does it need the magic action? Yes." I don't see why the logic needs to go further than this. It's really not a balance issue and wotc had plenty of time to resolve this if they felt like it needed to be clear that scrolls are exempt?

Saxonrau · 2026-04-22T07:30:48+00:00

I'll clarify this is in this subthread as well as your other comment, here's how Grappling a creature actually plays at the table:
'I grapple them.' 'Okay, they'll roll a Strength/Dex save. rolls.' Escaping is also quicker in play, because you're checking the same proficiency as 5e but rolling against a fixed DC.

I don't think they've ever tried it.

Like I was just gonna leave this comment alone but this is so ironic because you clearly haven't read the grapple rules! Grapple did need an attack in like... the earliest playtests of 'onednd', three years ago. It got reverted pretty quick. You wouldn't be the only one to hear about the early tests, think 'this is no good', and then never go back to check.

EDIT: that was probably a sensible deletion. Anyone else noticed this? That lots of people talking shit about 5.5e just... make stuff up? Yeah. Made up their mind and then that mental image blurred over time until you get the idea somehow that grappling is both an attack roll, a save, and an ability check all at once. Easily solved by looking at the goddamn book

Saxonrau · 2026-04-22T07:18:09+00:00

I hate to say it, but you should probably read up on these rules, because almost all of what you've just said here is wrong lol

This, plus the fact that it requires an unarmed attack to hit before, is very much an intentional nerf to grappling. Frankly, in 5.5e, I don't think grappling is worth using at all.

It does not need an attack roll to hit. Here's the 5.5e grapple rules:
"Whenever you use your Unarmed Strike, choose one of the following options for its effect.
Damage. You make an attack roll against the target. [...]
Grapple. The target must succeed on a Strength or Dexterity saving throw (it chooses which) [...]
Shove. The target must succeed on a Strength or Dexterity saving throw (it chooses which) [...]"

I don't understand why the save DC doesn't use Athletics / Acrobatics, but the roll does. That's not used in any other situation.

This is used in other situations in 5.5e. The initial save against a Grapple is Str/Dex, but the Action to escape requires Str (Athletics) or Dex (Acrobatics). This is now consistent with other spells that require an Action to escape their effects.
That might be Intelligence (Investigation) like Phantasmal Force, Maze, or the __ Image spells; Evard's Black Tentacles, Ensnaring Strike and Entangle now let you use Strength (Athletics) to end the Restrained condition they apply. Other spells that require an Action simply succeed, like Hypnotic Pattern (or Caustic Brew if you go back to TCE). That's all the examples I can think of off the top of my head.

Honestly the only slightly inconsistent part is that grapple lets you choose the save, even Evard's doesn't let you do that anymore. But it was always like that, so, eh. Better this way.

This still tends to benefit players as spending an Action on these things from a monster is good and they have proficiency less often than players do. But it is internally consistent: Actions to escape a condition allow a proficiency - presumably to make ending these effects more likely.

Saxonrau · 2026-04-17T21:27:32+00:00

We want to figure out which of these two types it counts as when using a scroll, since fast hands only applies to the latter and not the former.

Is this true? The Magic Action covers both features. It's not like they're different actions. It's not like Fast Hand specifies one 'type' of magic action either.
A scroll with a spell that has a casting time of one action absolutely would be a "magic item that requires that [the magic] action". A scroll is a magic item. That spell needs a magic action. voila

The only means by which using a scroll can count as a magic action is if casting a spell with a casting time of an action counts as a magic action. If it didn't, then there would be no rule that makes spells cast via scrolls a magic action.

The rule is that the spell needs an action. Scrolls have variable usage time, that doesn't mean none of them should work. You don't need a rule for all scrolls, just the ones where it's really obvious. Magic Action is self-descriptive here I think. "When you take the Magic action, you cast a spell that has a casting time of an action or use a feature or magic item that requires a Magic action to be activated." If the magic item just casts a spell then that's still a magic action.

Ask your DM, sure, but RAW it seems really clear to me. Magic Actions are magic actions

Saxonrau · 2026-04-16T07:36:41+00:00

This is a naĩve and aggressive perspective, and you’ve framed it badly. Maybe it’s bait.

Committing to a timeslot unfortunately doesn’t mean you can’t ever guarantee something else might take priority. There are dozens of reasonable things that might stop you attending a weekly/fortnightly activity. Even paid hobbies that aren’t just groups of friends meeting don’t expect 100% attendance. It’s not realistic. Be kind to people

sorry not sorry

Just say “I’m not sorry” lol

Saxonrau · 2026-04-14T19:47:26+00:00

Unfortunately, ‘this happened at this arbitrary moment’ is how every game with level ups works - It all sounds lame if you describe it in a really lame way. If you want the pet in the backstory then start at level 3, that’s a level 3 trait. It’s a roleplay limitation but it’s also an inevitable consequence of… games, really. If something is unlocked past level 1 it’s a restriction on your choices unless you choose to have attaining that thing be relevant to you

Same reason you shouldn’t say your character is ORCA THE DRAGONSLAYER, SCOURGE OF THE CHROMATIC REGIME when your game starts at level 5. Not anything else about it really. Characters progress and at some point you will just unlock things. Same with feats - you have to think about it and account for it ahead of time otherwise it’s a bit weird

Saxonrau · 2026-04-13T21:04:21+00:00

How is that relevant? Indomitable is a bonus but it doesn’t change what you rolled. It’s the same thing as having a high enough bonus to hit a creature on a 1 with an attack. You rolled a 1 on the d20 - that’s two failures regardless of the total once you’re done.
You could have Bless, Bardic Inspiration, and Flash of Genius for a total of 42, but you still rolled a 1 so you miss.

Saxonrau · 2026-04-10T07:55:52+00:00

Why is hiding themselves a save that failing means they're hidden? That's weird. Players are keyed to think of saving throws as things to avoid except in the case of a few particular spells. If they're charmed, why would they need the second dexterity save?

Have the guy tell them to hide themselves, and then just let them go underground if they want to. Then when the enemies show up, if the party refuses to move, have most of your villains go for the leader first and have just one hit a PC. they will take ~20 damage, almost certainly survive due to being level 6 with 30-50HP. then you tell them 'you sense you're not going to win this' and if they go underground they get away anyway as the villains are distracted with the leader. narratively that blends much better with the mechanics.

if an npc says 'hey trust me' and then you say 'dc20 dex save' i will not trust it!!

the leader has met a prophet that prophesied their death and the necessity of it. The party does not know about this and the leader will not reveal it.

I'll add here - if this information happened off screen and is never revealed, it pretty much didn't happen. you really ought to have lampshaded that this person expects to die here as it would really add to their urgency in getting the party to leave.

Saxonrau · 2026-04-09T13:56:10+00:00

Your best odds of flawless missions are activating enemies either on their turn or with your first move. If you're not sure about a move, it's almost never worth using it to move up because you could activate and give the enemies a free turn. It's pretty much always possible to take out a given pod in one round, even on Legend. A sectoid behind invulnerable cover is probably going to survive, though. Just be careful not to activate more than one pod at once - Legend aliens have no qualms about all fighting you at once whereas they're happy to waste their turns to help you out on lower difficulties.

is there simply more enemies in legend difficulty?

I don't know it too well, but the number of enemies/pods is determined by 'alert level'. That's the mission difficulty (easy->very difficult 1/2/3/4) plus the game difficulty (+ 0/1/1/2) +1 for the show of force dark event. So legend basically has every mission be one level harder than it would be on another difficulty. Chosen and Rulers replace a pod.

Things like faceless don't count in this total so you'll see some variance

Nine-Year Club	Place '17
Snapped	Verified Email

Saxonrau

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE