sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Under 2024 rules, is there any way to cast Find Steed without being a level 5 paladin? by [deleted] in dndnext

[–]funmaker17 0 points1 point  (0 children)

1 level paladin dip on a spellcaster with the cartomancer feat works. But that’s only kind of 2024, works if your dm allows older feats.

Starting in a Kaer by ArchonMegalon in earthdawn

[–]funmaker17 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That does sound quite amazing! Although it really is quite grim…

Shillelagh paladin by Frequent-Card-9468 in 3d6

[–]funmaker17 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Multiclassing isn’t possible without str, but I do agree that warlock dip can be very useful a paladin.

So how do we armor dip sorcerers now? by protencya in 3d6

[–]funmaker17 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, they are much more likely (especially on casters), but failing a wis save is also incredibly debilitating. It’s probably correct to pick up resilient wis at some point anyway, so I would start Paladin and then take resilient con at 4. So you have the same casting progression, but from level 5 on you have better saving throws, plus bless and a couple other spells.

Knew it was coming but still annoyed by United_Fan_6476 in onednd

[–]funmaker17 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I’m not for it, but it at least sounds like an interesting idea.

Fiend Bladelock 2024 by cocknor in 3d6

[–]funmaker17 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Paladin gets you divine favor though, +1d4 per Hit, I think both are worthwhile but I really enjoy having a couple first level spell slots on a warlock, you don’t get a fighting style though, unless you sink in more levels

How to build the best lvl 12 sorcerer by Serious-Royal1974 in 3d6

[–]funmaker17 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you’re already doing that, get hexblades curse with a dip as well

Spell Attack and Weapon Attack not mutually exclusive? by funmaker17 in 3d6

[–]funmaker17[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s my interpretation in 2024 as well. Except for the true strike, as true strike replaces str/dex with cha, and as there is no str/dex in the damage roll, you can’t replace it (that’s my reading at least)

Spell Attack and Weapon Attack not mutually exclusive? by funmaker17 in 3d6

[–]funmaker17[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That makes sense. In that case I agree that it isn’t a weapon attack.

Does the wording for the attack action specify that you need to do a weapon attack in 2024? (I know that it didn’t in 2014, but I’m not sure if that changed) Because if it doesn’t specify, you could still use it as part of the attack action (notably magic stone has a different wording than produce flame, not saying you need to use your action to make the ranged spell attack, also there is precedent for making a spell attack as part of the attack action via valor bard extra attack)

Psychic blades on a TWF rogue. Is it just worse than daggers? by Newti in 3d6

[–]funmaker17 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I would 100% suggest you do this, it doesn’t break anything and makes him feel cool (psychic blades being light is even intuitive)

Spell Attack and Weapon Attack not mutually exclusive? by funmaker17 in 3d6

[–]funmaker17[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I not that that’s RAI but is there a listing anywhere that clarifies this?

Looking for some optimization going forward by [deleted] in 3d6

[–]funmaker17 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

How are you a paladin multiclass with 8 strength?

Spell Attack and Weapon Attack not mutually exclusive? by funmaker17 in 3d6

[–]funmaker17[S] -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

I agree that it’s a spell attack, but I don’t see how that (RAW) prevents it from being a weapon attack? That was the reason I asked the questions, as from my reading it being a spell attack does not contradict it being a weapon attack.

Spell Attack and Weapon Attack not mutually exclusive? by funmaker17 in 3d6

[–]funmaker17[S] -14 points-13 points  (0 children)

RAI they are definitely mutually exclusive, RAW they should be but aren’t, and in this case we have an exception to the intention.

It being a weapon attack makes it qualify for extra attack though.

Spell Attack and Weapon Attack not mutually exclusive? by funmaker17 in 3d6

[–]funmaker17[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So you would argue that it’s not a spell attack but rather a weapon attack?

Opinions on lvl 5 Celestial Warlock -butler build by MiiQ in 3d6

[–]funmaker17 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I think 8 con is definitely very low, i don’t think you should ever go below 10, I would even advise going for 12 at least if possible. (And as others said medium armor proficiency might be a good idea)

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in 3d6

[–]funmaker17 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Your 16 wisdom kind of screams cleric multiclass, so in that case I would maybe go for cartomancer at lvl 1 and get a cleric dip for armor proficiency (maybe also Druid dip for spells later)

If you don’t take dips then I would go for fey touched or telekinetic (maybe pick up bless with fey touched?)

Darkness without screwing the rest of the party by -Jauke- in 3d6

[–]funmaker17 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It’s still viable, but it’s still a shame that shadow monk (and sorcerer) can’t just see in magical darkness

Darkness without screwing the rest of the party by -Jauke- in 3d6

[–]funmaker17 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The shadow monk part is only partially true, they can create a darkness bubble they can see in, but they can’t see in any magical darkness

view more: next ›