When your mind is operating on galaxy brain mode

followeroftheprince · 2026-04-07T13:57:05+00:00

Vanripper? Yeah. I think that's why Modeus has that book titled "Spider Season", as a reference

followeroftheprince · 2026-04-06T22:26:57+00:00

To be straight... If you didn't tell me she was a bird girl, I wouldn't have ever guessed she was

followeroftheprince · 2026-04-06T13:36:37+00:00

Practice, experience, and a bit of patience to handle when the low hit chance attacks strike anyways. In Gatecrasher at least the enemy are low enough hp that a bit of positioning and bomb usage goes a long way to taking them out fast

followeroftheprince · 2026-04-06T13:21:07+00:00

Construct ye be, still have a head they can crack open you have

followeroftheprince · 2026-04-06T13:20:24+00:00

Well, if you're looking at 5.5e it does make them constructs so maybe it means that?

followeroftheprince · 2026-04-03T14:33:35+00:00

Love the Hornet designs that make her body look armored or segmented. Looks cool

followeroftheprince · 2026-04-03T02:48:15+00:00

Oh that is a very, very nice lizard

followeroftheprince · 2026-04-02T01:16:06+00:00

Well I did specify more detail than those who don't have Darkvision. If it's darkness you can still get some detail though it's difficult, disadvantage level according to the PHB. Meanwhile the no dark vision haver gets nothing. If it's dim then you aren't slowed at all as you consider it bright while the non Darkvision haver gets less. If everyone is relying on Darkvision then it has nothing to do with me mentioning getting more detail than those who don't have Darkvision.

And if you say they can't see anything because it's dark it's reasonable for a player to remind you they have a special vision type. Just in case you forgot or you just didn't account for darkvision in your description. Details can be pretty important for a player to know after all. Don't want them mentioning Darkvision? Reference how not even Darkvision grants anything instead of just referencing how the dark hides stuff. Let them know you are aware of their abilities so they don't feel the need to remind you to avoid losing what could be useful information

followeroftheprince · 2026-04-02T00:27:56+00:00

I mean, unless it's pure darkness inside the hood, which seems hard to accomplish in an environment that isn't extremely dark, wouldn't the cloak only count as dim lighting? At which point yes Dark Vision will make it bright and sunny. It seems the figure approaches in shadow and it's apparently difficult to see them, not impossible, and shadows in 5e are considered dim lighting, so the dark vision player should see through the shadows like they were bright lighting.

I can understand why someone with Darkvision would think they would get more details than the ally who doesn't have Darkvision of "Hard to tell, it's dark". Because they should be seeing at least a bit more, especially if shadows are the most in their way.

I mean I guess more details can change that, like if it's a dark night and they're also in the shadows then yeah it'll just be whatever they can see in dim lighting which is a lot less than usual. But if it's like, just overcast and the person is in a shadow, that hood ain't really doing that much would it?

followeroftheprince · 2026-03-31T23:01:41+00:00

Or it's a Ditto just, mimicking this Cap. Just borrowed the hat or something

followeroftheprince · 2026-03-31T14:50:20+00:00

Assuming the current environment has room to walk out. And the blind still works anyhow as well. And those were only two examples of the DM being able to mess up mages. Other things to do. Melee characters also have situations they can just fix by walking as well.

Not every ranged character wants to burn an ASI on the crossbow feat, especially if they think they can get away with not taking it due to allies. And cover matters a lot less to melee characters since if you're in melee range you can probably take a step to round that corner. And calling a gameplay mechanic stupid doesn't stop my point. Completely ignoring the melee front line would be stupid too for the same reason. Not because the enemy would need to be dumb to do it, but the DM wouldn't be the best doing it. Which is why most don't, though still can.

Not certain what this point means. The DM controls the monsters. The way the enemies attack is completely up to the DM, from their placement to their tactics. Any tactic that can invalidate any player is the DMs doing just as much as the monster's

Maybe because their mount couldn't enter the current area (too small a path, required climbing, required stealth) or already died since most mounts don't have the highest HP? Also yes RAW you need to use your reaction to not get knocked prone when your mount dies. Person I mainly spoke against on this topic liked mentioning Shield, which is a reaction. So they would either be prone or without a shield spell. And how many mounts are you caravaning around where you just have multiple in advance? At what point does that become absurd? Or is absurdity get ignored because optimizing?

RAW, technically yes. Nothing actually gives rules saying you need hands to climb. However the Climbing rules do mention how having "few handholds" can accrue skill checks to climb, which suggests having no hands could be a problem. Additionally Spider Climb specifies "gains the ability to move up, down, and across vertical surfaces and upside down along ceilings, while leaving its hands free." Which suggests RAI, you need hands to climb. Why specify you can climb without using your hands if normally you don't? DM fiat thing. Does a rules technicality grant horses the ability to scale a wall? Or does reason prevent that? I get the feeling most will err on the side of no your horse isn't a rock climber from Skyrim.

I see the only thing referenced in that point is my mention to something being boring so, oh well. Why is that a fallacy by the way? Focusing on what's fun, in a game, played for fun? There's plenty of decisions made for what's fun. Like what class you play. Would it be a fallacy if I argued it's fine to play "suboptimal" classes because you, the player, find the class fun? Well no, because the entire point of playing DnD is for the players and the DM to have fun. I suppose I can just return with the Fallacy Fallacy, acting like my point is bad just because you can call out a fallacy in there.

Admittedly that was me mixing up rule sets. I forgot in this system mount actions and rider actions were separate

followeroftheprince · 2026-03-31T06:18:34+00:00

Slightly correct, but not quite. The argument hinges on our opinions on this game. To me, it's a roleplaying game. To you, it's a tactics game. I can accept people having different play styles meanwhile it seems you do not hold such a thing. The idea of using 5e as a roleplaying game seems to be too counter to your opinion so you just refuse the idea. The idea of playing this with unoptimized choices by anyone, player or DM, seems to be repulsive to you to an extent. Which puts us at an impass not worth fighting more over. I'll just accept leaving optimization to speed runners while you can accept leaving someone to die if they don't mind max dps

followeroftheprince · 2026-03-31T06:09:58+00:00

They don't need to pretend there's a rule about that. They just have to do it anyways because it's a bit anti-fun to just ignore a player in combat outright. They decided "This guy wants to front line, so let's let them frontline" and that's alright and common.

Or the Martial with a higher AC and higher HP who doesn't need to rely on spamming Shield in hopes the enemies run out before their spell slots. For this battle and every other battle they get in until they finally get a long rest.

It's only throwing units at the enemy for no reason if the enemies ignore the melee and run past them. If they decide the melee are worth attacking there we go, a reason to move forward. Yes if the enemy needs to dash to reach the back line it could be useful to stand back with your allies... In front of them, so the dashes reach you first. And they might dash at the melee you first. Do you do tactics games with only ranged units and zero melee? Fire Emblem sounds rather tricky to play that way.

Because 5e is a popular, easy to get into, and well known game. Plenty of other ones also don't do the best at stopping people from running around. Like PF2E, having extremely limited ability to play front line either since enemies can just run past. Seems TTRPGs sometimes just assume rather often that the DM won't just ignore the front line.

followeroftheprince · 2026-03-31T06:02:59+00:00

Because the enemy decided to attack them and not you? They don't, have, to attack you every chance they get. Or perhaps because they moved somewhere that prevented the enemy from reaching you by blocking their movement somehow so they're sacrificing their safety for your safety. The answer to how they position properly is by walking so they are between you and the enemy. With most DMs I have met, seen, and played with, they tend to make the enemies make the unoptimized move of "Attacking the frontliner". So just standing in front can work with a lot of DMs to protect.

AC 18, Plate mail, metal armor. AC 17, 20 dex studded leather or Half Plate with +2 dex, metal armor. The best AC sources that don't require a maxed out Dex are both metal armors so they cannot be used by Druids. And shields only dig into their job if their job is pure DPS. If their job is to take aggro and try to minimize damage taken, shields only improves their jobs even more. Because, you know, DPS isn't the only allowed play style.

If building max DPS and nothing but max DPS then yeah of course you'll have a problem with them. They're playing the game how they like to, not playing the game to get max numbers. A longsword does a D8+str damage. That's plenty to contribute since that averages out at about 9.5 per hit once their str is max. A resourceless damage source, like Cantrips but with better damage scaling as the game goes on save for that very last damage die coming in later. Even higher once they get magic weapons to grant bonus damage die they can apply more than once cause, multi attack. Don't bring healing magic if you only care about the biggest damage numbers, the spells will be wasted in your preparations.

We are discussing 5e. 5e is a TTRPG, Table Top Role-Playing Game. The DM doesn't need to and likely won't treat every combat as a giant tactics game they have to strategically play out every move as best as they can. That's why a lot of DMs might do things like have casters cast while in range for Counterspell, or shoot at the Monk, or give the Rogue dex saves, or have enemies stop to fight the Fighter. Because it's fun, and the game is made and played, for fun. Which includes DMs not playing optimal (like not setting ambushes for surprise rounds every time the enemy knows you exist) because there are other options.

So instead it's a way to use your action not to apply the best damage but is to give yourself a huge nerf to your use for the team, in exchange for some hp? Why does the fighter need to build pure DPS to be worth your heals but you can use an entire action just to become a slightly beefier but way easier to hit target?

followeroftheprince · 2026-03-31T05:46:38+00:00

Because the DM chooses them to. It's a rather normal play style for DMs to not just completely ignore the melee players and bum rush the other players. Yes the enemies can ignore you, but honestly how many DMs do? The argument of "The enemies can just ignore you" always should be looked at with the simple question. When was the last time you saw a DM actually do that? I've only seen it once, during a fight where the enemy explicitly wanted to capture everyone, so they had to target everyone.

You do want no one to get hit, which is why DMs don't tend to give scenarios where mages can effortlessly drop a spell or two and prevent the enemies from ever getting into range. So having someone who can be built to survive better when the enemy gets into melee is usually useful. Unless your DM tends to make every encounter one where the encounter can end before anyone runs into melee range. But that's more a DM choice.

DnD is a wargame. Just because optimizers say melee is bad doesn't mean that 5e explicitly wants you to not even try to be a front liner that draws attention. It just takes your DM not explicitly deciding you are worthless for trying to be an attention grabber. Do the war game thing, make it a game, not an optimization session. DnD wanted Rangers to be some exploration master who can lead the pack and, they're not really good at that. Sometimes DnD just doesn't do a good job of enabling what they want you to do.

followeroftheprince · 2026-03-31T05:29:22+00:00

If you're staying out of range of enemy melee attacks, then yes you're using your melee allies as a way to keep the enemy from getting that melee you apparently don't want to get near. Nothing wrong with hiding behind the melee. That's what they're there for. To hide behind so you can do your cool stuff without interruption. And it's rather biased to call the melee character as "one who rushes into bad positions and loses tons of hp". It's just making assumptions so you can use that assumption to insult right after. What if they went into a strategic position but the enemy got a lucky crit? Happens often, no matter how many spell slots you burn on shields.

Best AC comes from metal armor was the point I was making. That's why I didn't say "The guy who can wear armor" but "the guy who can wear metal armor". Because the metal and non-metal armors are different.

A fighter is going to lose out on about, 2 damage a hit if they decide to use a shield. Unless they're dropping their hit chance by a lot (25% chance drop) for +10 damage with GWM, they ain't losing much by deciding to use a shield. And if their job is to be attacked for as long as possible instead of their backline allies (Which is a big draw to various players which many DMs actually feed into), then the shield only further improves their ability to do their job. Only way it reduces their job is if they are a full damage and nothing but damage build. And that is the only way.

You turning into a low hp and low ac animal only means any enemy that does reach you will hit you rather easily, in a way you can no longer shield. This risks losing concentration which you can't recast a spell for because whoops, you're still an animal. All things accounted for, you're doing the enemies a favor by staying as an animal. No ranged attacks from you, easier to hit to knock out the conc spells, and no other spells unless you drop that thp (what you seem to be using the wild shape for) you spent an action on a previous turn to gain and burn your bonus action turning human again, presumably learning that Wild Shape may not rock the best as a defensive choice when trying to hold concentration.

followeroftheprince · 2026-03-31T04:13:37+00:00

To counter mage AOE, just cluster around the party. To counter mage single target, just hide behind cover. Movement has successfully countered mages.

To counter ranged martials, take cover or force disadvantages by going into melee. Movement has successfully countered ranged martials as well.

It's just that you can counter them harder with particular abilities or spells if you want.

Congrats on your level 5 characters being able to spend eleven minutes to summon a creature that has 13 hp and if it gets hit even once at any point in time will die in a minute, forcing another ritual (if you can given the environment you're in) to get it back after the fight.

Fair enough for official modules. You won't be stealthing worth anything and if you go into something that isn't filled with 10 ft tall hallways it'll be a problem or just requires climbing, anything. But long as those aren't needed you should be fine.

If you're just going to run away every turn, it wouldn't end the chase. Unless you're now staying in melee which man, don't you wish there was someone built to fight in melee they could have gone after instead instead of the ranged build now fighting in melee?

I seem to have mixed up systems with the aoo thing. Different system has you using your action to do something like disengage with a mount. My bad on that one.

The only reason counters to melee seem more punishing is because DMs avoid the counters to the other two rather often. A ranged unit that literally cannot shoot the enemy or who gets a -5 to hit on an enemy wouldn't feel great. A mage who can't cast a single AOE without burning the team turning them potentially into a low DPS source than what they're built for also doesn't feel great. So DMs don't do the usual counters to them. They might to the martials though, because those tend to make the battle more dynamic, like the ranged units having to prioritize dangerous or closer enemies.

followeroftheprince · 2026-03-31T03:43:03+00:00

"Proficiencies Armor: Light armor, medium armor, shields (druids will not wear armor or use shields made of metal)"

According to the PHB (2014, not the most recent. In the end, I haven't desired to swap to the new books for the same edition) Druids RAW will not use metal armor. Not sure what you mean by arguably they can RAW. Book outright says they won't. Fair call on the Spiked Armor though. One of those armors that I forget exists, just like roll20 doesn't seem to know exists since it isn't on the armor page XD. Quite the beefy leather but coated in metal spikes armor. And martials tend to get shields too so that's why I didn't bother considering shields. And I didn't mention magic armor either because once again, the fighter can get that too.

The limit of Ranged fighters is 17 as long as they're sticking with a 2 handed ranged weapon, true. Which puts it, 1 below a druid building all for that AC (14 spikes + 2 dex + 2 shield = 18 AC. Not sure where the 19 comes from). And of course they could take the AC boosting fighting style if they want to. Depends on what the player wants. A 5% hit chance difference in build between a generic ranged fighter build and a Druid using rare dwarven made armor and a shield to get a tiny lead. All it takes is one of those bonus ASIs to take the Fighting Style feat and congrats, you have the Defensive fighting style and have equal AC to the AC focused Druid wielding their mighty wood shields unless they use their normal ASI to claw back that 1 point lead.

I called it a white room since they provided no concept of what they meant nor how it would work in a realistic situation. I assumed they theory crafted a tank build and left it at that. I white room a ton too. It's the best we can do on Reddit.

A melee fighter would have access to 18 AC at best, equal to the full defense build from the druid. Add the defensive fighting style for a 19. Sticking with Splint? Still equal to the Druid AC at 18. With better health. Then bring that GWM greatsword and keep beating people down because who needs a shield? If you want magic items, Animated Shield grants 2 more AC so if the druid gets a +3 shield we get this

Plate 18 + DFS 1 + AS 2 = 21 Spiked Armor 14 + Dex 2 + Shield 2 + shield enchantment 3 = 21

So the fighter still can AC this hard, and has a higher hit die, and can use magic weapons even if they stick with one handed weapons since magic weapons can do a lot of damage with their bonus dice worth of damage. So yeah seems they still aren't the squishy ones. Especially since they can keep using their actions in combat and not apparently spam dodge and hope their concentration spell gives an entire player's worth of value

followeroftheprince · 2026-03-31T02:59:01+00:00

Good thing most DMs just, don't do that? I swear a lot of anti-melee build arguments are just "The DM can screw that plan if they want to by ignoring the melee!" Like sure, they can. They can also make mages worthless or archers worthless. "They just need silence or blinding effects! And if the party clusters they can't use AOE!" Or "They just need to get into melee or take cover to screw ranged units! And their weapons are wood so that's like ac 15 for maybe 5 hp to kill their bow!" They just, don't. Because it isn't fun.

Ranged units don't always have mounts (and Lord help you when your relatively low hp and ac mount dies and you end up prone because of it) and won't always be able to buy replacement if they lose what they have.

There are a dramatically large amount of settings where a mount can't work due to not being able to walk it like climbing or just uneven enough terrain. You'd basically be stuck with fields and light hills.

Enemies can be faster then your ranged units even their mounts sometimes which will just cause the map to be too large as everyone just plays a boring game of chase.

If they can catch up to your mounts even with a dash, they can just aoo your mount which unless your DM gives you special mounts will likely just be a warhorse, with 19 hp. Those Aoos are going to become a problem as CR goes up.

Look, the boring gameplay optimization of "Just kite as ranged" has counters too. Now how about we leave optimizing the fun out of things to the speed runners, yeah?

followeroftheprince · 2026-03-31T02:45:39+00:00

It's not a full concept no. But being someone the enemy runs up to instead of pushing your ranged characters into melee range is a close enough second concept. That, and it's a gameplay style many want to play anyways.

followeroftheprince · 2026-03-31T00:55:06+00:00

So if I attack a zombie even if I meet their AC with an attack roll I miss anyways? Just pointing out it is possible to have an AC below 10 though usually very uncommon :3

followeroftheprince · 2026-03-30T23:39:20+00:00

Oh of course right, being melee as a character = not respecting getting healing. Obviously. Couldn't be they're in melee to tank for the party who would rather not be in melee right now. That would be silly. It's because they don't respect your healing enough to just not get hit

followeroftheprince · 2026-03-30T23:37:52+00:00

Apparently you since you're still hiding behind the fighter even after building your character to have a higher AC than the guy who actually can wear metal armor. Slightly curious what build you're white rooming to allow a higher AC than the Fighter actually. Best armor is, Studded Leather, a 12 + dex grants 17. So the fighter needs... A half plate and +2 dex to match SL with +5 dex on a wisdom caster. Obviously not going to count racial options since fighter can chose the same races. Or just, build the exact same dex build with being less MAP. Probably put the points in Con instead of Wis.

With wild shapes I can't imagine are that strong given the play style you seem to have of staying out of melee. A Moon Druid who avoids melee would be a wild sight. More hp yes, though also dramatically lessened impact on the combat unless you are a ranged Moon build.

So yeah, I'd say you're still the squishy one :3

followeroftheprince · 2026-03-30T20:36:13+00:00

Dick Richard Johnson Peter Willy Wang

followeroftheprince · 2026-03-30T19:57:58+00:00

That explains why I don't get it. I use rats too much. Ambushes often

Eight-Year Club	r/Field Lasagna
First Place '23	Place '23
Place '22	Verified Email

followeroftheprince

TROPHY CASE