5th Edition Questions


4th Edition

51 to 100 of 196 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

The Skilled feat is the way to increase skills, outside of class abilities (like Lore Bard or certain Warlock Invocations) or multi-classing into a class that grants an additional skill. Tool and Language proficiencies can be learned by spending 250 days and a like amount of gold learning them.

As for the Pan Pipes, if you want that and Perform (which would include Dance), I'd suggest talking to your DM about either swapping out one of your languages for the Pipes proficiency, or just letting you have it (since it's unlikely to make a difference in most adventure scenarios).

As bookrat said, Tool proficiencies are used when a physical object (like an flute or lock pick) is necessary to perform the task. Skill proficiencies involve things that don't require the use of equipment (though the latter can certainly help in some instances.)


Kalshane wrote:

The Skilled feat is the way to increase skills, outside of class abilities (like Lore Bard or certain Warlock Invocations) or multi-classing into a class that grants an additional skill. Tool and Language proficiencies can be learned by spending 250 days and a like amount of gold learning them.

As for the Pan Pipes, if you want that and Perform (which would include Dance), I'd suggest talking to your DM about either swapping out one of your languages for the Pipes proficiency, or just letting you have it (since it's unlikely to make a difference in most adventure scenarios).

As bookrat said, Tool proficiencies are used when a physical object (like an flute or lock pick) is necessary to perform the task. Skill proficiencies involve things that don't require the use of equipment (though the latter can certainly help in some instances.)

I'm the DM and I'm learning the system as I go. I already have the Skill Feat and was disappointed that it wasn't a Feat that could be taken more than once. Seems to me that should have been the case.

Musical instrument is under Tools which would require a proficiency.

Within the Charisma ability checks under the Performance skill it reads: "Your Charisma (Performance) check determines how well you can delight an audience with music, dance, acting storytelling, or some other form of entertainment."

So by selecting the Performance Skill is a character able to do all of those things proficiently or does the player select which type of entertainment? I get the impression your character can do it all. By music do they mean singing but not playing an instrument? Under the Dexterity skill it talks about making an ability (Dex.) check to play a stringed instrument.

So what about a woodwind instrument? Do I take the Performance skill (for music)and the Musical Instrument Tools Proficiency both and then add the proficiency bonus together? That would give me a +4 proficiency for tools and another +4 for Performance for a total of +8.

If I was to take Dancing it would fall under Performance also but that would be at +4. Does that sound right to you?


Kalshane wrote:

The Skilled feat is the way to increase skills, outside of class abilities (like Lore Bard or certain Warlock Invocations) or multi-classing into a class that grants an additional skill. Tool and Language proficiencies can be learned by spending 250 days and a like amount of gold learning them.

As for the Pan Pipes, if you want that and Perform (which would include Dance), I'd suggest talking to your DM about either swapping out one of your languages for the Pipes proficiency, or just letting you have it (since it's unlikely to make a difference in most adventure scenarios).

As bookrat said, Tool proficiencies are used when a physical object (like an flute or lock pick) is necessary to perform the task. Skill proficiencies involve things that don't require the use of equipment (though the latter can certainly help in some instances.)

I have already taken the Skills Feat once and according to the way the book reads it can only be taken once. That's a rule I don't agree with. I can see taking only one proficiency in each skill but I think there needs to be a way for the character to learn new skills as they progress.

Example: If a fighter wanted to learn how to make armor at a later level he couldn't do it at all if he already had the Skill Feat taken at character creation.


EileenProphetofIstus wrote:


I have already taken the Skills Feat once and according to the way the book reads it can only be taken once. That's a rule I don't agree with. I can see taking only one proficiency in each skill but I think there needs to be a way for the character to learn new skills as they progress.

Example: If a fighter wanted to learn how to make armor at a later level he couldn't do it at all if he already had the Skill Feat taken at character creation.

In this case, the fighter should probably invest in proficiency with the armor-smithing tools. That can be picked up with an investment in time and about 250 gp.

As far as the skilled feat and taking it more than once, I think it's worth considering why a single PC needs that many skills when other PCs could be picking up that slack. By the time they consider taking the feat a second time, they've got 2 background skills, 3-4 background skills, 3 more skills from the first time they took the feat. How many more do they really need?
That said, it's a pretty small house rule to allow that feat to be taken more than once - just applied to different skills/proficiencies. I doubt it would affect the game's balance.


EileenProphetofIstus wrote:


So by selecting the Performance Skill is a character able to do all of those things proficiently or does the player select which type of entertainment? I get the impression your character can do it all. By music do they mean singing but not playing an instrument? Under the Dexterity skill it talks about making an ability (Dex.) check to play a stringed instrument.

So what about a woodwind instrument? Do I take the Performance skill (for music)and the Musical Instrument Tools Proficiency both and then add the proficiency bonus together? That would give me a +4 proficiency for tools and another +4 for Performance for a total of +8.

If I was to take Dancing it would fall under Performance also but that would be at +4. Does that sound right to you?

I think the intent isn't to stack the modifiers together. Use the one that's most specific to the case.

In general, think of things the PCs want to do as stat checks. Performing to entertain is a charisma-oriented activity so you make a Charisma check.
If you are proficient with a relevant tool or skill - add your proficiency bonus as well. Allow PCs to be creative with it too. If they want to entertain with a tumbling act, have them make a Charisma check (to see how well they perform) but allow them to add their proficiency bonus if they are skilled in acrobatics. If they want to intimidate someone by smashing something, have them roll a Strength check but allow them to add their proficiency bonus if they are skilled in intimidate. Basically have fun with it and be flexible.


I am curious, Eileen. If you are both the DM and just learning the system (so presumably, you know more about the system than your players), why are you trying to convert a relatively high-level character as your first experience? It would seem much more sensible to me to start at 3rd- or even 1st-level.


Arakhor wrote:
I am curious, Eileen. If you are both the DM and just learning the system (so presumably, you know more about the system than your players), why are you trying to convert a relatively high-level character as your first experience? It would seem much more sensible to me to start at 3rd- or even 1st-level.

I have only one player and she is relatively new to gaming and played just a smatter of 3.5 with me. We decided to give 5th edition a try. I had an ongoing campaign before my divorce with my ex. The campaign was absolutely a blast but many things were never completed. So my friend and I decided to pick up where my ex and I left off. More of a personal decision than anything. The learning curve will be harder but I'm not to worried.


Fair enough then.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Maybe just do a practice session of levels 1-3? Those first 2 levels go by REALLY fast.

Maybe re-explore the origins of your favorite character, then "fast-forward" to 11th level?


EileenProphetofIstus wrote:
I have already taken the Skills Feat once and according to the way the book reads it can only be taken once. That's a rule I don't agree with.

I ran a campaign with only 2 PCs and to help them cover all the bases, I gave them both the skilled feat for free (plus allowed it to be taken more than once, although they didn't choose to go with that option). I would definitely allow the skilled feat to be taken multiple times - I think it's a fair price to pay and I don't think a broader character is ever in danger of becoming over-powered (presumably spotlight-hogging is the danger they're trying to avoid by limiting it, but with a small group that isn't really an issue).

I think it's important to appreciate that 5E is designed to be tweaked to meet the needs of the group. In other systems I can understand a desire to 'stick with RAW' but in the case of 5E I think sticking close to the rules in the book is almost going counter to how it's designed to be used - the DMG is full of 'how to houserule' sections and even the sage advice column often has answers along the lines of "here's how I'd do it" rather than "here's how it's supposed to work".

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Is your campaign going to be 1 PC and 1 DMPC (a PC controlled by the DM)?


SmiloDan wrote:
Is your campaign going to be 1 PC and 1 DMPC (a PC controlled by the DM)?

Yes it is, I prefer a gaming group of 3-4 players but we really don't have anyone to play with. We were on Roll20 for awhile but it was hard to play with complete strangers. We were playing my Legion of Superheroes RPG I have been writing over the past few years. With a regular size group I would rather not play a character but with super small groups or at the request of the other players I have created my own character.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Small groups are tough.

My current group is 6 (was 7 until the ranger had to move away for real life business), so we have a DM and 5 players now.


SmiloDan wrote:

Small groups are tough.

My current group is 6 (was 7 until the ranger had to move away for real life business), so we have a DM and 5 players now.

When I was in high school we typically had 3-4 players, sometimes it increased to 5-6 at the most but just for a game or two. 3-4 PC is my sweet spot regardless of what game I played. I haven't played D&D since they unveiled 4th edition so I'm pretty excited and its been fun taking a 3.5 11th level cleric and re-doing her with 5th edition. That's why I was into the dance and music earlier when we were posting. I'm trying to match her up so she feels the same. So far things are looking really good.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

I like 5 PCs. You can cover all your bases in D&D, plus 1 outlier, like my campaign's (former) ranger and our current barbarian.


Does CM/D still exist?

I've seen some claims that its even worse in 5e; but I haven't seen it yet in game or in analysis.

Here's the original claim (I'd link it, but I'm concerned for your sanity):

Spoiler:
Side bar, but uh, in 5e casters are more powerful relative to everyone else than they ever have been in D&D's history, for a few reasons.

- Hitpoints are higher compared to damage output than ever before, making killing things through damage even worse. Mages still can force saves against losing a fight just as well as before (and sometimes without allowing one, like Sleep).

- Bounded accuracy means that minions are always powerful, and are especially powerful in huge swarms (and a 5e necromancer can cart around an army of hundreds of skeleton archers, along with their outsider friends). This also renders physically oriented 'heroes' totally unnecessary, as there is no time where a martial character isn't 100% outclassed by a squad of militia with bows (or the mage's pets).

- You can't purchase magical gear anymore (and are, in fact, not expected to get many magic items at all over the course of a long campaign), and the only things you really have to spend money on are more spells for your spellbook or material components for your outsider army.

- Low level targets utterly outclass martials. Enjoy fighting Challenge 1/2 hobgoblins, who on an average hit (30% vs scale + a shield) kill a 1st level fighter.

- High level targets are crazy fat hitpoint sponges for martials to deal with (seriously, it takes your average 20th level fighter 10-11 rounds to kill a Challenge 20 target, if they even have the chance to make attacks. Picked out of a hat, a C20 Ancient White Dragon kills a 20th level fighter in 5, if they wanted to waste their time doing that).

I don't want anyone to get the wrong idea from vague, unsubstantiated statements and make a purchase they'll regret (buying the core 3 books is 150 freaking dollars ffs).

EDIT: Also, fun fact! Simulacrum actually got buffed in 5e. It only costs 1,500 gp flat to cast and is 100% identical to the creature, except that it has half hitpoints. All of its abilities are fully as powerful as the original. You can only make them out of beasts or humanoids, but considering wizards are stronger than ever before and they get 100% of your spellcasting capability, why would you want to make a simulacrum of anything other than yourself? The only thing scarier than 5e wizard is an army of thousands of the same 5e wizard, each with their own army.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Re: bookrat's copypasta:
-Hit Points/Sleep: Weird, I'm told hit points can go down really quickly, especially at higher levels. Sleep also depends on current hit points, so if hit points are higher, it's harder to use. A lot of SoBS effects require concentration to maintain, which means you can't also be buffing yourself/an ally.
-Minions can definitely be relevant, but you start getting enemies resistant to non-magic weaponry (or just flat out immune to it). I usually summon creatures that grapple on hit, and that costs my concentration. Maintaining your zombie army costs you slots now, as otherwise you lose them after a day.
-I mean, if you're assuming it's a level 1 fighter and there's at least two hobgoblins. You have to adjust to the new CR system because it ain't like 3.x. Putting a lvl 1 against a CR 1/2 1v1 puts it as an "Impossible" encounter.
-I made a thread asking about how the game goes at lvl 10+, and I've heard PCs tend to kill monsters very quickly. Putting a lvl 20 character against a CR 20 monster proves anything, the DMG tells you that's an "Impossible" encounter.

I think these statements are made with expectations/assumptions based off 3.x, but that's not a proper way to evaluate the game.

Gold in 5e can't be taken for granted, because it's no longer part of expected progression as it once was. 1.5k is a lot. Then the spell takes you half a day to cast, so you essentially need downtime to do it, and the close eventually outlives its usefulness if it is a caster, as it runs out of spell slots and cannot regain them. I won't disagree, it's definitely a powerful spell nonetheless.


Looks like I got the skills all straightened out. Some of the bonuses seemed higher than I expected. At 11th level with a prof. bonus of +4 and a wisdom bonus of +5 (Wisdom 20) I got a few at +9 (Performance (Dance), Animal Handling, Insight, and Perception. A couple of skills ended up at +10 Arcana and Religion because I am a Cleric.

Liberty's Edge

EileenProphetofIstus wrote:

Spells: I'm recreating my 11th level cleric and I see she has some scroll and I cannot find a couple of the spells in 5th edition.

Invisibility Purge

Invisibility Purge

4th-level abjuration
Casting Time: 1 minute
Range: 60 feet
Components: V, S, M (a silver mirror 3 inches in diameter or smaller)
Duration: 1 hour
You pick a point within range and create an area 10 feet in radius. Any creature that enters this area invisibly, due to magic or natural ability, is instantly rendered visible.

Someone went through his old Wizard and Priest's Spell Compendiums from 2nd Edition and reworked the spells to 5e.

LINKY .


DM Jeff wrote:
EileenProphetofIstus wrote:

Spells: I'm recreating my 11th level cleric and I see she has some scroll and I cannot find a couple of the spells in 5th edition.

Invisibility Purge

Invisibility Purge

4th-level abjuration
Casting Time: 1 minute
Range: 60 feet
Components: V, S, M (a silver mirror 3 inches in diameter or smaller)
Duration: 1 hour
You pick a point within range and create an area 10 feet in radius. Any creature that enters this area invisibly, due to magic or natural ability, is instantly rendered visible.

Someone went through his old Wizard and Priest's Spell Compendiums from 2nd Edition and reworked the spells to 5e.

LINKY .

Thank you, it looks good too.


Spells Question: I was reading some of the spells for 5th edition and questioned the wording on a few. The similarity of the spells were that seem to affect an area and score damage. The wording was identical from spell to spell and I'll use Blade Barrier (2nd paragraph of the spell as an example.)

"When a creature enters the wall's area of effect for the first time on a turn or starts its turn there, the creature must make a Dexterity saving throw. On a failed save, the creature takes 6d10 damage. On a successful save, the creature takes half as much."

My question is in regards to this: "When a creature enters the wall's area of effect for the first time on a turn or starts its turn there, the creature must make a Dexterity saving throw."

The words "For the First Time" are throwing me off. Can someone elaborate? I'm probably reading into this more than I should.


I'd rule that as if they start their turn in the blade barrier they take damage. If they don't start their turn in the blade barrier, but move in to it, they take damage.

What you're probably reading too much of would be: they enter, leave, enter again. A strict reading might suggest that their second entry allows them to avoid damage, but I would not rule it as such.


That's exactly the issue I was having, It would seem poor if they enter, exit and re-enter that they wouldn't get reinjured. I'm thinking it was poor wording but I wanted to clarify because several spells read that way.


Well I knew I would be getting to this....Healing.

A short rest (1 hour) enables you to roll 1 hit die plus your con modifier and regain that many points back. If you have more than one level you can keep rolling a new hit die plus con modifier until you roll them all.

So a 1st level fighter has 10 hp, plus a Con mod. of +2, for a total of 12 hit points. They take a short rest and the player rolls 1d10 and if the result were a 10 they would add 10+2 (Con bonus) and be at maximum Hit points again.

A long rest (8 hours) the character automatically is returned to full hit points (all injuries are healed). If they had taken any short rests earlier that day they regain half their level in available HD for additional short rests later that day (24 hours).

A character at level 10 has ten HD. During the day they take 4 shorts rest and use up 6 HD to regain hp. At the end of the day they take a long rest, regain all their hp and also get 5 more HD remaining for short rests to use later in that 24 hour period.

Did I understand that correctly?

Do the same rules apply to the Monsters? If so I imagine it would be very frustrating for characters who severely injure that dragon but must retreat before defeating it. The next day they return at full HP only to find the dragon once again at full HP too. Granted it wouldn't be fair if the PCs got all their HP back from a long rest and the dragon was still injured.


Ok. Rereading it, it says "the first time on a turn." So it's meant to make it so a creature only gets hit once a turn. A creature could enter, take damage, leave, reenter, not take damage - if all of that happens on the same turn. The next turn, they're free to take damage again upon reentering.


bookrat wrote:
Ok. Rereading it, it says "the first time on a turn." So it's meant to make it so a creature only gets hit once a turn. A creature could enter, take damage, leave, reenter, not take damage - if all of that happens on the same turn. The next turn, they're free to take damage again upon reentering.

After reading the combat chapter I think your right. The first turn (their action during the round) they suffer damage, they use a move to push through....they get past it. If they move back out and still have enough movement left to use, they could run through without taking any further damage. If they wait until the next round, the damage starts all over again should they try to enter.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Monsters can use Short Rests and Long Rests.

Our 10th or 11th level party fought a CR 20 dragon 3 or 4 times. Once we rushed it after driving it off, got to its lair, and found 36 empty potion bottles!!! :-O

IT DRANK OUR TREASURE!

But we eventually chased it off and got a ton of treasure. We went from a party of 6 with two or three magic weapons and maybe 1 or 2 magic armors to being fully stocked with magic pretty much. Not 3.5 or PF Xmas Tree Effect full of magic, but everyone got something NICE.

I think we were supposed to drive off the dragon, sneak into its lair, steal some nice items, and use those items to kill the dragon.

Instead we drove off the dragon, got overconfident, tracked it to its lair and challenged it, ran away, tried sneaking back into the lair and got ambushed, ran away again, came up with an even better plan, and drove off the dragon for the last time, and stole its remaining treasure and then fled the area via magic.

I wouldn't be surprised if it comes back towards the end of the campaign with a taste for vengeance.


The wording on Blade Barrier and similar effects are so that a creature can't take more damage moving in and out of damaging effect than just standing in the middle of it for the whole turn.


Bill Dunn wrote:


In this case, the fighter should probably invest in proficiency with the armor-smithing tools. That can be picked up with an investment in time and about 250 gp.

Is there a specific rule stating one can learn more "Tools" for 250 gp or some such similar rule? If so where can I find it?


EileenProphetofIstus wrote:
Bill Dunn wrote:


In this case, the fighter should probably invest in proficiency with the armor-smithing tools. That can be picked up with an investment in time and about 250 gp.
Is there a specific rule stating one can learn more "Tools" for 250 gp or some such similar rule? If so where can I find it?

PHB p.187 under Training


A friend of mine wants to convert a PF module to 5e. What are your guidelines for conversions?

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Our DM did that for RotRL. I think he changed most DCs to 1/2 + 4 or something to fit "bounded accuracy."

The legendary and lair actions added a lot of zest to BBEG fights.

He said it took him only a few hours per part to convert. I think he also cut some of the grind fights from it, too.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I convert PF DCs to 5E using (1/2DC+4) and that seemed to work okay throughout all levels. I use this formula for both skills and saving throws.

Monsters, I generally substitute a 5E monster and add an action (or reskin one) to capture the PF monster's feel.

Traps take a bit of effort - I generally increase the damage a fair bit (since it becomes very hard to kill a 5E character, doing monstrous amounts of hit points is a good way to soak up some resources if the party gets caught by the trap, without too much risk of permanent defeat).

Treasure is pretty subjective. When I ran CotCT, I divided gold value by 100 and took out almost all magic items. I'm running RotRL next and my plan is to run a high loot, high magic game (with the treasure pretty much unchanged).

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

We are 5 and 1/2 parts done with RotRL. We got a few trinkets and such at levels 1-10, then

spoily goodness:
we drove off a dragon got its lair loot
at level 11. It really affected the fun and power level of a lot of characters, and in a good way.

You may have to convert a lot of items, as the way magic works is really different. Also, bounded accuracy. I think some magic weapons don't even give a +1 bonus!!! They have other benefits, though, that are NOT insignificant. :-)

We're level 12 and almost done with the AP, and from what I've heard, most APs go from 1-14 or 16 or so. So lower level PCs can do more in 5E.


One of my players has requested a "classic fantasy adventure" for a campaign. He requested this before we started playing OotA, and while it's very fun, a demon infested underdark world with slowly growing madness it's not a classic fantasy adventure.

I feel that elemental evil will also be kind of dark and dungeon dwelling, and I haven't heard good things about Dragon Queen. The next major adventure to come out is Ravenloft, and he absolutely does not want to play that. When I invited him to my table, he very specifically said no Ravenloft. I think he's tired of horror settings and just wants a normal, lighthearted adventure.

Got any ideas? I'd prefer not to transfer a PF AP, as I'm really liking the sandbox feel of the 5e adventures so far and the APs always felt very linear and railroady. I'm open to 3PP. I'm also open to linking together shorter modules.

Just looking for advice on some light-hearted adventures with a classic fantasy feel.


I think the general feeling really depends on the party as much as how you set it up. Say this because our DM for Hoards has turned into a more light-hearted adventure, though it has its moments of 'oh crap' too.

Elemental evil is extremely open. You could turn all the cults into bumbling fools with one of them just happening to get it right before the heroes get in there way. There is a lot of dungeons but I'd think classic fantasy tends to have those no? Based on the party I've had submitted it's going to be more lighthearted due to them (one of them is literally playing a jester clown so...yeah).

Otherwise haven't really looked over too closely any 3rd party modules so can't say much there. I have converted and run one paizo dungeon from Emerald Spire Super Dungeon that went surprisingly well last week. Players had a lot of fun and the monsters converted over surprisingly cleanly (with some very minor adjustment of encounters, mostly removing a creature or two here and there). It was only actually about I'd say an hour or two of prep to convert all in all.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

We're doing a RotRL conversion, and it's not TOO railroady.

We did PF Kingmaker, and it's super sandboxy. It would probably be easy to convert to 5E. Maybe incorporate some Settlers of Catan for the actual kingdom running. We only played parts 1 and 2, though.

I remember the kingdom running rules being a bit tedious. It's probably something I would have preferred doing over email instead of taking away precious table time (we only play about once a month).

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Why not go online and download some 1e or 2e modules? Their available for free from some websites. Your pkayer wants 'classic' and there few things more 'classic' then early DnD modules.


Yeah. I was considering doing that. Might just homebrew something too. But I also was curious to see what else was out there that others may recommend.


bookrat wrote:

One of my players has requested a "classic fantasy adventure" for a campaign. Got any ideas? I'd prefer not to transfer a PF AP, as I'm really liking the sandbox feel of the 5e adventures so far and the APs always felt very linear and railroady. I'm open to 3PP. I'm also open to linking together shorter modules.

Just looking for advice on some light-hearted adventures with a classic fantasy feel.

What levels are you looking at? I'm very familiar with all of the older TSR modules.


Any, really. I'm just looking ahead for the campaign after Out of the Abyss. Legendary Planet looks really interesting to me - I wonder if my players would be interested in that.


It's looking good to me (got the first instalments today) but I don't think it will fit your player's criteria of 'classic fantasy'.

Dark Archive

SmiloDan wrote:
We're doing a RotRL conversion, and it's not TOO railroady.

Currently playing in a 5e conversion RotRL myself, we're up to Book 2. The missus (our GM) is not looking forward to the later number-crunching.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Our DM said it wasn't that hard. It only took him a couple hours per book. He also trimmed a lot of the grind out of it. We're a few levels lower than we "should" be, but we're doing OK. The encounters are challenging, but not TOO stressful. Mostly.


I imagine the conversion would be less work if I wasn't running RotRL in Roll20. Having to convert the monsters and then plug them into Roll20 as well as setting up the maps and tokens and all that takes forever. On the other hand, the actual game session runs a lot smoother in 5E than it did in PF.

Sovereign Court

I'd wonder if it would be worth it to re-tool later encounters with your own monster selections rather than to have to futz about with lamias and wendigos and other beasties that just don't have a 5e equivalent.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

We fought a bunch of

monsters!:
yeti and abominable yeti
and it was a pretty good substitution of
monster:
wendigo
.


I converted the Wendigo because I felt it was kind of essential to the feel behind that whole sequence. I did replace the Frost Worm with a powered-up Remorhaz, though, because I've always thought they were cooler and were definitely more iconic.


I could not find any rules on what alignments are allowed for clerics based on their deities. Do they have to be the same as the deity? Up to one alignment step away? Is there no longer any specific alignment choices for a cleric based on their Deity?


EileenProphetofIstus wrote:
I could not find any rules on what alignments are allowed for clerics based on their deities. Do they have to be the same as the deity? Up to one alignment step away? Is there no longer any specific alignment choices for a cleric based on their Deity?

I don't think there's any restriction.

I remember somewhere (the flavor section in the cleric entry of the PH, probably) the possibility of a cleric being forced to serve a deity against their will - that seemed to me to be tacitly supporting the idea that a cleric needn't share much of their deity's goals/nature/alignment at all.

51 to 100 of 196 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Gaming / D&D / 4th Edition / 5th Edition Questions All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.