Shepherd Druid: able to solo DiA?

[5eNeedsDarksun]

Spoiler: So many spoilers in this thread I dunno if it's even worth spoilering anymore

Show

An entire party being unlucky at the same time, is not only far less likely, but they're better able to deal with it since they're multiple pools of hp, resources and diverse abilities. Rolling low can cripple a solo character, even with Lucky and shouldn't be waved off when the whole point is about the viability of all of this.



Gotcha



That's a meta player way of thinking, the PC is looking at life and death and doesn't know what will lead to the deaths of innocents or missing vital loot that could make a difference (or if the monsters left behind will become a threat to them resting or fighting later).

And... it is meta, you're a hero willingly going into hell, there's some seriously alignment questions flying over people dying that you could help.



Preparing for corner cases should be at the forefront of a solo characters mind, since they are the least prepared to weather those corner cases unprepared.

1hp is just like above that yes, and Goodberry takes an action to cast and an action to eat a berry with no RAW support for feeding others. You don't even need to prep Cure Wounds, leaving Healing Word on the table when it could top you up mid combat whilst you continue to cantrip away is reckless.

Also, no CW is not a bad spell. IDK what your expectations of it are, but I'd wager they're too high.





And the points where you'd rest safely without neutralising threats in the area/without the support of saved locals?

And saying that most of it seems skippable to you is not addressing anything. I didn't say 'most of it is unskippable' I said too much was.



You can't handwave a discussion as pointless when it's the crux of the proposed playstyle. Blindly running from one gang of enemies in a city like Elutriel will very plausibly have you run into another (I know I sure as hell wouldn't let a PC just endlessly run around in that city to kite, this isn't a nice peaceful open field.)



I said this, but working with spoiler and quote tags can be a pain so I get it.



So, just hoping that in the few minutes of acclimating the Druid will happen to move in the opposite direction?

The reading I've done of that section (a few times now because of this thread) seems like they're basically emerging from a side street in from of the party, they're not magically appearing, but they're clearly not visible at a distance. You're basically inserting leeway to support kiting and distance that the module doesn't seem to intend.

There's nothing to indicate they won't attack everyone in initiative, and Lulu quite frankly, is not much of a threat.



NPCs getting injured to any degree is the PCs burden, if the Druid doesn't burn resources healing them then the likelihood they'll die in encounters they shouldn't goes up dramatically.

Oh and if you did bring Reya, she'll probably be interested in that silvered sword you wrote off.



So if you do have wolves... say what does any of this even look like if you don't manage to get Wolves or Velociraptors in hell?



If only the PC and NPCs had that meta knowledge and no motivations for killing a fiend that's actively trying to steal the souls of innocents they're around.



You also have a high check that you're relying on another 2nd level slot to get around.



Silvered weapon in hell is nice for everyone, as mentioned previously, including Reya.



So it's more logical that a dangerous denizen of hell or the abyss is trapped behind a simple wooden door rather than some commoners that may be too dehydrated, panicked or injured to clearly hear and reply to you?





My whole issue is that you are using probability to mean success by and large, with little to no account of rolling poorly or things not going the Druid's way.


Calculation detached from reality of play are misleading and not particularly helpful.



I mean, in the example of Con checks it was 1s, 2s, 3s, and 4s, and despite what probability says, if you can't roll with bad rolls, you're basically dead.

Case in point: I ran a game Sunday night, during that 6 20s were rolled and two 1s were rolled at once on an advantage roll. I don't really care what the probability of those things are, they happened, the party (and my encounter design) could tolerate that happening.

This isn't about never failing, it's about being able to tolerate failure and low points, which this build just doesn't.



I don't think you'd even have to get extradinarily unlucky, I think this Druid would fail more often than it worked, especially since your calculations are backed up by conveniently being at distance and avoiding a large number of encounters.

Oh and enver running afoul of the environmental hazards.




I'm not really sure what this idea of attrition through loss of summons being so strong to you is. If they do nothing but chew through your summons they get plinked by the Druid, and by the end of it the Druid is still at full hp with a bevy of lower slots to apply to the future situations.

Focusing on summons will never not be meaningless suicide for intelligent creatures. Who cares that you're killing weak summons when the clearly more powerful caster is left untouched?



And they're able to move past the summons and go for the Druid.

Focusing fire on a single enemy (which ALL of your DPR calcs seem to assume) does not work with also blocking them from going for the root of the problem.



The campaign that this is only viable in if you skip the first 4 levels?

The campaign that multiple posters are disagreeing this would actually work in?



No, they do, your perspective assumes that you start at and can maintain distance regardless of what is happening.



A mightysummoner backed wolf is not, in anyway, close to a full 6th level+ character.

The assumption that it's 9 actions, is faulty. One of those actions will often be summoing the summons, then those summons will die off pretty quickly. It's 9 actions for a single turn assuming that the summons are already up.

And the magical weapons thing, eh? First part of the module you can snag a silver dagger and there's a silver longsword in a random encounter. There's numberous class/subclass abilities that makes damage magical, just like the one the Druid is relying on...



Holes that you're inserting into the game? Maybe I missed it but I don't remember mentions of small openings and rat holes everywhere.

...How are they bad at noncombat stealth? The Druid is expending a 2nd level slot and concentration to achieve the same thing, and mixing in Wildshapes. That's heavy resource expenditure in comparison to passive Rogue abilities. Even then, high Dex+Expertise+something like Psi powered knack is extrenely good, and unlike PwT will get better as time passes. The Druid took Lucky to mitigate Concentration saves, so why wouldn't the Rogue take it (or something else) to mitigate low stealth rolls?



Really I wouldn't.

Please show me your example in reality that shows such a creature riding an equivalent sized creature as Lulu ( you don't even need to find a small elephant!)... whilst it flies through the air at over 13mph during lightning strikes.

Lulu doesn't exactly come with cat/rat compatible tack to make this more plausible either.

The assumption that this just works is as ridiculous to me as the thought it doesn't just work is to you.



That's a lot of potential candidates for 3 luck points.



The point of kiting is to run away from something whilst attacking it, I've never seen kiting used with the assumption you need summons (or PCs or whatever) up front to punish the things giving chase.

This assumption is also based on the things chasing having an equal or lower speed to the caster. Whilst V.Human is your suggestion, the premise of the thread is a Halfling, and they're one of three PHB races with lower speed.



That's fair, when presented without a disclaimer is makes it look like it's relevant to the module directly though.



Already pointed out that initiative is rolled, and that does matter.

Here's an example of where that neat plan goes horribly wrong:

Initiative is rolled and results in this:

Hound

Druid

The hounds miss their turn and the Druid gets to summon their creatures. The creatures roll above the Druid and miss the first round. They however roll below the hounds (or at least a single hound) and proceed to be fire breathed before they can even move.

The Druid and, if you happen to get them, Wolves have pretty meh initiative modifiers, the Hell Hounds are only one worse off so it's down to the D20. The above doesn't even account for them having separate initiatives which, I'd probably give them since they're two creatures, rolling together doesn't really save any effort and only really serves to do them disservice.

Or let's say that the Wolves don't kill a Hell hound on the first turn and then get blasted through, maybe they miss, maybe they roll low, whatever, point is:

This can go wrong very easily,



Noted, not what I'd have chosen at all and pretty much dedicated to a singular playstyle with no room for error.

You wouldn't even have Summon Beast to cover if the Druid ran out of 3rd slots?

Not pedantic, how initiative turns out can mean that the summons don't get to take advantage of initiative at all, as covered above.




And multiple posters very experienced in 5e disagree. The key being that one side is reliant on things going very favourably for their point of view to come out as correct, the other is just looking at the module are written (and in some instances, as experienced).



It doesn't really balance out though, the point at which they become dependent on more rests can get them killed because they have absolutely zero way of dealing with rests safely. They're also missing vast amounts of loot and if played experience points style, potentially xp.



You pretty much have to fight the skeletons, they're presented as accosting the players, no chance for sneaking past, they're introduced as attacking them. At which point your previous strategy of kiting falls a bit flat, since the Minotaur Skeletons have a superior movement speed and an incentive to charge the Druid since they'd do more damage by charging anyway.



And if the summons aren't optimum? Even your strategy seems to assume near total loss of summons to overpowering them.

The Incorporeals however are far more than just annoying:

They're concealed in pillars with no possible way for the Druid to know they're there.

They have superior movement speed, incorporeal movement and can leave the Druid with debuffs that will last and hinder them until a long rest, which they are (as already established) terrible at securing for themselves.

4 Shadows alone could kill the Druid in a single turn through Strength Drain. Let that sink in.

This isn't an annoyance, it's death waiting to happen without a convincing argument otherwise, because there's zero reason for them to not just ambush the Druid and/or ignore any summons. heck there's enough of them to do both attack the Druid and their summons (actively weaking their DPR if the shadows are going for the summons btw).



You should not assume convenient holes for the Druid to Wildshape through where they aren't denoted in the module. I mean come on, that's nothing but taking liberties.



Is it trivial? How is the PC knowing whether to fight or not? They're literally watching Yuggoloths fight Demons, how are they meant to know that if they don't try and KO the winner they won't fight them?

And if they do try and stay out of it, they then have disadvantage on a parley that they have no reason to know would happen, or the conditions for the disadvantage.
[/SPOILER]



The only way these things are overpowered is if players are allowed to dictate everything in whiteroom fashion.




The casting time and need for a supplie of remains don't even register as a problem to you?

Running around with a horder of evil undead creatures doesn't seem like it would be a problem? Not even for finding a place to rest?




This has absolutely nothing to do with a spell, NPCs can have whatever they like for minions without needing to adhere to the same ruels and realities as PCs.

That same encounter could have been a near TPK is you had decided that the Wizard had hired a group of 12 mercenaries (insert whatever creature here).


You know what, yeah a Druid could probably 'solo this module' if the DM was being favourable and ruling to accomodate the Druid's abilties.

Oh wait, the same can be said of literally any class.

So bringing up missed loot and XP? Yes, clearly you'll be getting less in total, but what you do get won't be divided by 4 or 5... It'll be divided by 1. I think the character will be OK there, probably more than OK and leveling faster than a group.

[Eldariel]

This has absolutely nothing to do with a spell, NPCs can have whatever they like for minions without needing to adhere to the same ruels and realities as PCs.

That same encounter could have been a near TPK is you had decided that the Wizard had hired a group of 12 mercenaries (insert whatever creature here).

What? A creature used 3 spell slots to produce an effect. Of course it's different than just adding 12 things to the encounter - a resource has been expended and it has an effect. It produced those with magic, ergo they're a part of his character sheet, just spells with lingering effects. PC could do the same to achieve the same increase in power, ergo complete transparency. If he hadn't used those 3 spell slots but had 12 hired minions instead, he would've had those Fireballs and it would've been a TPK (obviously he didn't have the opportunity given how the campaign unfolded, but assuming a white room), but it would've also been 4v13, not 4v1 + spell effects. The fact that he consumed resources to produce minions was relevant but of course, if he didn't have those minions the fight wouldn't have been anything near close and he would've just gotten popped in short order, so it was optimal use of those resources.

NPCs might not play by the same rules in 5e games in general, but they do in my games. I didn't award any XP for anything but the Wizard - the Barlgura from SGD and the Skeletons and Zombies I counted as spell effects; I wouldn't grant any more XP for PCs surviving a Fireball cast by the enemy either. I would, however, obviously award more XP for any enemies that did not come from the NPC's class resources (e.g. the bandits he'd been working with in the earlier fight, where the Wizard was forced to retreat; incidentally, lots of trouble went into recovering and animating their bodies to produce this force, there were no living bandits left for him to use).

[Dork_Forge]

So bringing up missed loot and XP? Yes, clearly you'll be getting less in total, but what you do get won't be divided by 4 or 5... It'll be divided by 1. I think the character will be OK there, probably more than OK and leveling faster than a group.

That was your only problem? Yes you get significantly less, and without metaknowledge have no idea if the loot you do get will actually be useful to you. Heck I remember before Avernus our party of 3 finding a big bunch of loot! That was primarily a bunch of Wizard spell books. We didn't have a Wizard.

What? A creature used 3 spell slots to produce an effect. Of course it's different than just adding 12 things to the encounter - a resource has been expended and it has an effect. It produced those with magic, ergo they're a part of his character sheet, just spells with lingering effects. PC could do the same to achieve the same increase in power, ergo complete transparency. If he hadn't used those 3 spell slots but had 12 hired minions instead, he would've had those Fireballs and it would've been a TPK (obviously he didn't have the opportunity given how the campaign unfolded, but assuming a white room), but it would've also been 4v13, not 4v1 + spell effects. The fact that he consumed resources to produce minions was relevant but of course, if he didn't have those minions the fight wouldn't have been anything near close and he would've just gotten popped in short order, so it was optimal use of those resources.

NPCs might not play by the same rules in 5e games in general, but they do in my games. I didn't award any XP for anything but the Wizard - the Barlgura from SGD and the Skeletons and Zombies I counted as spell effects; I wouldn't grant any more XP for PCs surviving a Fireball cast by the enemy either. I would, however, obviously award more XP for any enemies that did not come from the NPC's class resources (e.g. the bandits he'd been working with in the earlier fight, where the Wizard was forced to retreat; incidentally, lots of trouble went into recovering and animating their bodies to produce this force, there were no living bandits left for him to use).

I don't use XP levelling the vast majority of the time, I prefer milestone, but my take on that is basically:

If they have minions, they don't need to have the slots instead. They could have the minions that the RAW version got through spells ands just not have any slots/spells above 2nd. It amounts to the same thing.

If you want PCs to be able to do whatever NPCs do then great, but it's functionally the same thing.

Resources the players don't see used in front of them are imo, irrelevant in being resources to begin with. If it's already in place why justify it?

If that's what you like to do at your table, all the power to you, for me it's just unneceessary meta work for me to do that won't actually impact my players.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

That was your only problem? Yes you get significantly less, and without metaknowledge have no idea if the loot you do get will actually be useful to you. Heck I remember before Avernus our party of 3 finding a big bunch of loot! That was primarily a bunch of Wizard spell books. We didn't have a Wizard.




I don't use XP levelling the vast majority of the time, I prefer milestone, but my take on that is basically:

If they have minions, they don't need to have the slots instead. They could have the minions that the RAW version got through spells ands just not have any slots/spells above 2nd. It amounts to the same thing.

If you want PCs to be able to do whatever NPCs do then great, but it's functionally the same thing.

Resources the players don't see used in front of them are imo, irrelevant in being resources to begin with. If it's already in place why justify it?

If that's what you like to do at your table, all the power to you, for me it's just unneceessary meta work for me to do that won't actually impact my players.

No, that's not my only disagreement, but most of the rest of it has been discussed and we clearly don't see it the same way. I just don't feel the need to re-refute every point.
The comments around XP and loot were new and I found them to be grasping at straws. The Shepherd in my campaign has a Wand of Magic Missiles as his only magic item at level 9. It's a non-factor. He uses it occasionally, and he'd still be the strongest character by a ton without it.

[Dork_Forge]

No, that's not my only disagreement, but most of the rest of it has been discussed and we clearly don't see it the same way. I just don't feel the need to re-refute every point.
The comments around XP and loot were new and I found them to be grasping at straws. The Shepherd in my campaign has a Wand of Magic Missiles as his only magic item at level 9. It's a non-factor. He uses it occasionally, and he'd still be the strongest character by a ton without it.

An offhand comment made as part of a far larger argument isn't 'grasping at straws,' it's an offhand comment about a minor (in the grand scheme of the proposal) consideration.

You keep (understandably) coming back to your touchstone of the player in your game.

It, frankly, doesn't matter how they're doing or what items they've kept from loot. They have a party behind them to cover what they aren't good at, watch their backs and stretch their resources.

Any degree of loot to a single character is significantly more important, because they're alone and the stakes are so much higher.

Being 'the most powerful character' in a party, doesn't amount to being a character capable of operating solo in an adventure designed for a full party.

Likewise, adding a bunch of summons on top of a party that should be able to handle the encounter without them is not the same as relying on those summons to handle the entire encounter for you.

Heck, come to think of it I hosted a competition about this premise and you know what? Not only did a Shepherd Druid not win, there wasn't even one suggested. I'm about to go to bed and can't be bothered rereading all of the submissions right now, but I don't think any of them were particularly summon spammy, but they were all far better rounded than the propsed soultion to DiA.

[Eldariel]

Being 'the most powerful character' in a party, doesn't amount to being a character capable of operating solo in an adventure designed for a full party.

Likewise, adding a bunch of summons on top of a party that should be able to handle the encounter without them is not the same as relying on those summons to handle the entire encounter for you.

Conversely, having a party doesn't prove that you couldn't handle it without them. This is a completely null point that doesn't really argue any point at all.

[Dork_Forge]

Conversely, having a party doesn't prove that you couldn't handle it without them. This is a completely null point that doesn't really argue any point at all.

That's not how this works, the module is designed for an entire party, the burden of proof is most certainly on proving that they can.

Though I'm not sure what you're even trying to poke a hole in tbh, I basically said the conditions that this character seemed so powerful in are completely removed from the conditions (and I assume playstyle) that they would be put through in a solo game. The frame of reference is faulty when applied as it is being.

My tired brain has spat out an analogy to hopefully help this come across:

I'm not saying A, so B. I'm saying that alphabet belongs to an entirely different language.

[Eldariel]

That's not how this works, the module is designed for an entire party, the burden of proof is most certainly on proving that they can.

Though I'm not sure what you're even trying to poke a hole in tbh, I basically said the conditions that this character seemed so powerful in are completely removed from the conditions (and I assume playstyle) that they would be put through in a solo game. The frame of reference is faulty when applied as it is being.

My tired brain has spat out an analogy to hopefully help this come across:

I'm not saying A, so B. I'm saying that alphabet belongs to an entirely different language.

You're saying "A character [which feels obscenely powerful to the point that it feels like it could solo the module] could not in fact solo the encounter because it is designed so.", which is an appeal to authority. But given 5e's blatant lack of regard for balance, it at best amounts to appeal to false authority though even appeal to authority is generally considered a fallacious argument. Your argument hinges on 5e design achieving its balance goals (even though it's not even stated to have such and it's trivial to showcase that if they did exist, they failed and horribly - cf. earlier discussions about Animate Dead and Conjure Animals vs. any other level 5 PC options), which makes the whole point vacuous.

[Unoriginal]

Might be a bit late at this point, but I got to ask:


Anyone would want to actually build a Shepherd Druid and test it out against one of the module's encounters? I can DM it.

[Dork_Forge]

You're saying "A character [which feels obscenely powerful to the point that it feels like it could solo the module] could not in fact solo the encounter because it is designed so.", which is an appeal to authority. But given 5e's blatant lack of regard for balance, it at best amounts to appeal to false authority though even appeal to authority is generally considered a fallacious argument. Your argument hinges on 5e design achieving its balance goals (even though it's not even stated to have such and it's trivial to showcase that if they did exist, they failed and horribly - cf. earlier discussions about Animate Dead and Conjure Animals vs. any other level 5 PC options), which makes the whole point vacuous.

I find it hilarious how discussions like this always result in a particular side (usually the one supporting the caster in question in whatever claim) accusing the other of a fallacy.

You say that my pointing to the intended party for the module is an appeal to authority, presumably saying that WoTC must be right. I'm not saying jack about WoTC, I'm going from my own experience running and playing in modules, which includes the one at hand and my own pretty extensive experience with 5e and the optimising there of, to say 'no, a character doing well in a party is not a good argument that they could do it all by themselves.' Even if you look at it as a false authority with WoTC, they don't even have to be right about the balance, the difference between any single character and a party is so great it gives them a great deal of wiggle room.

Though I'm very curious, you assumed I was basing it off of what WotC say and call that a false authority, but you refer to discussions had by certain forum members as an authority..?

The spells you're referring to are only 'busted' balance wise if you let a player run rampant, ignoring intent and in game common sense and verisimilitude.

And you have been arguing with me about this long enough now, that you should certainly know my argument isn't 'but the module says it needs more people.'

Whereas your argument heavily calls on an interpretation of the module so favourable to the Druid at hand, it's laughable. (multiple times you've assumed that a Druid can just slip through a rat hole or similar to avoid encounters, despite there being no description of such), and there still isn't a convincing argument how this Druid is going to sleep alone in Hell.

Might be a bit late at this point, but I got to ask:


Anyone would want to actually build a Shepherd Druid and test it out against one of the module's encounters? I can DM it.

I'd absolutely love to see this.

[Thunderous Mojo]

The one question I would ask you is why do you think OotA doesn't work as written?

Both modules start with a good concept, and have a decent take off.
Both modules stall mid flight.
Both modules really don't have much concrete guidance on how to 'land the plane'.

That is my 'take' in a nutshell.

Now OotA does have some very good pieces. The initial Drow Outpost, The Myconids, The Duergar city...these are all solid.

The other areas...don't thrill me as much...and once the party hits the surface halfway through I think some momentum is lost...as at this point too many locations could have been visited, (especially if the party did the NPC bus line to each prisoner's home location).

I do want to stress, this is my subjective, aesthetic opinion, and is certainly not the only view, possible.

OotA has more 'heart' and detail, than DiA. (Again, my opinion only)

One of my friends gave me a Lulu plush toy, which my German Shepherd claimed as her own. Lulu vs Garn, (or Fenris).....the Wolf won...Lulu was thoroughly dismembered. 🤭

[Eldariel]

Might be a bit late at this point, but I got to ask:

Anyone would want to actually build a Shepherd Druid and test it out against one of the module's encounters? I can DM it.

If you don't mind slow pace (I can only post erratically), I'd be down (I already posted the Vuman Shepherd; I can flesh it out to this end). Though I think it would make sense to run through a whole dungeon? Since the whole point of contention is the sufficiency of resources.

Though I'll first have to ask: How would you run Conjure Animals? How much control do I have over what I get?

[5eNeedsDarksun]

Both modules start with a good concept, and have a decent take off.
Both modules stall mid flight.
Both modules really don't have much concrete guidance on how to 'land the plane'.

That is my 'take' in a nutshell.

Now OotA does have some very good pieces. The initial Drow Outpost, The Myconids, The Duergar city...these are all solid.

The other areas...don't thrill me as much...and once the party hits the surface halfway through I think some momentum is lost...as at this point too many locations could have been visited, (especially if the party did the NPC bus line to each prisoner's home location).

I do want to stress, this is my subjective, aesthetic opinion, and is certainly not the only view, possible.

OotA has more 'heart' and detail, than DiA. (Again, my opinion only)

One of my friends gave me a Lulu plush toy, which my German Shepherd claimed as her own. Lulu vs Garn, (or Fenris).....the Wolf won...Lulu was thoroughly dismembered. 🤭

Hmm, I'll agree that OotA does stall at the mid point. Also that there is Way more detail; a functioning map and a reasonable set of encounters as the group is travelling is a start (and totally missing with DiA). I definitely modified the last half to include a whole stroryline on Thembershaud becoming a dracolitch and the party having to intercept him before he met Orcus. But I do think that the 2nd half OotA is playable, if a bit linear, without adaptation.

I'll disagree that DiA has a good start, despite that there is more detail than is really needed on BG; as written the characters have no real motivation to continue to hell. I followed the advice of others and linked the characters to Elturel instead of BG, which I think is a way better connection to the rest of the mod. Chapter 2 is good, and after that there are some really interesting characters and ideas, but it's basically not a module. From level 7 on it's an outline at best, one that both my players and I are enjoying, but due to a lot of work from me.

[Thunderous Mojo]

I'll disagree that DiA has a good start, despite that there is more detail than is really needed on BG; as written the characters have no real motivation to continue to hell. I followed the advice of others and linked the characters to Elturel instead of BG, which I think is a way better connection to the rest of the mod. Chapter 2 is good, and after that there are some really interesting characters and ideas, but it's basically not a module.

I largely concur with this.with this. The opening is "good" as it contains an interesting dungeon, the Dead Three cultist have excellent stat blocks that can be used to challenge players. Unfortunately, it just doesn't exactly fit with the rest of the module.

(It would be a great start to a political intrigue style campaign set in Baldur's Gate...similar to the civil war in the Roman Republic).

If the Players select the binding secret: We all are involved in a murder and cover up, the group could, conceivably, be playing Lawful Evil characters...whom may not care one whit about rescuing the rival city of B.G., Elutriel.....it is a poorly considered adventure hook.

[Unoriginal]

If you don't mind slow pace (I can only post erratically), I'd be down (I already posted the Vuman Shepherd; I can flesh it out to this end). Though I think it would make sense to run through a whole dungeon? Since the whole point of contention is the sufficiency of resources.

While that would be interesting, I can't commit to running a whole dungeon online currently.

Plus it's far from the only point of contention.

Though I'll first have to ask: How would you run Conjure Animals? How much control do I have over what I get?

For this I would let the Druid pick up any animal they want. Just to see how the Druid handles the encounter with favorable ruling.

[Eldariel]

While that would be interesting, I can't commit to running a whole dungeon online currently.

Plus it's far from the only point of contention.

For this I would let the Druid pick up any animal they want. Just to see how the Druid handles the encounter with favorable ruling.

Sure, I'll try to write up a character tonight. I'll just run the spell list I posted already earlier and go with the Vuman Lucky/Res: Con. Really, mechanically it's just items but I should build the character itself.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

Sure, I'll try to write up a character tonight. I'll just run the spell list I posted already earlier and go with the Vuman Lucky/Res: Con. Really, mechanically it's just items but I should build the character itself.

I hope you guys post back to let us know how this goes. I'll be really interested to know.

[Unoriginal]

Sure, I'll try to write up a character tonight. I'll just run the spell list I posted already earlier and go with the Vuman Lucky/Res: Con. Really, mechanically it's just items but I should build the character itself.

For additional info, I'll be using an encounter from a point the module suggests having the PCs at lvl 7, so you can use a Druid of that level.


Now, there's two options for the encounter: do you want the one that is part of the "main storyline", or an optional one the book mentions?

The optional one would be deadlier, but it *is* one of the potential dangers a PC group can run into regardless, so a PC capable of handling the module in solo should also be able to handle it.

[Eldariel]

For additional info, I'll be using an encounter from a point the module suggests having the PCs at lvl 7, so you can use a Druid of that level.


Now, there's two options for the encounter: do you want the one that is part of the "main storyline", or an optional one the book mentions?

The optional one would be deadlier, but it *is* one of the potential dangers a PC group can run into regardless, so a PC capable of handling the module in solo should also be able to handle it.

Let's go with the potential one first and run the other one later if you still feel up for it. I think I'll just make a mechanical character and leave the character personality vacuous since this is mostly a mechanical test. Sorry I failed to post it last night, I fell asleep putting my kid to bed.

[Eldariel]

Okay, mechanical character write-up. You wanted level 7? Well, I guess I'll just level-up the stuff I posted here earlier:

Spoiler: Shepherd of Mielikki

Show

Class: Druid (Shepherd) 7

Race: Variant Human (Damaran)
Name: Gierdre Baltakis, the White-Eyed
Age: 35
Height: 5'5''
Weight: 110lb

Background: Far Traveler
Alignment: Neutral good
Deity: Mielikki Bluecloak, Mistress of the Woods

Personality trait: I begin my day with small traditional rituals that are unfamiliar to those around me (worship of the great bear, the master of the forest, a gift to the lady, and every 30 day the Song of Trees)
Ideal: Inquisitive
Bond: My freedom is my most precious possession. I'll never let anyone take it from me again.
Flaw: I pretend not to understand the local language in order to avoid interactions I would rather not have.

Spoiler: Point buy

Show

Str 8
Dex 14
Con 14 (+1 race +1 Res: Con)
Int 8
Wis 15 (+1 race)
Cha 12

Feats/ASIs:
1. Lucky
4. Resilient: Constitution

Final stats:
Str 8
Dex 14
Con 16
Int 8
Wis 16
Cha 12

Skill proficiencies:
Stealth
Perception
Insight
Persuasion
Investigation

Tool proficiencies:
Dragonchess

Languages:
Common
Damaran
Sylvan

Items:
Traveler's clothes
Dragonchess set
Pearl necklace (10gp)
Quarterstaff
Sling
Pebbles (50)
Hide Armor
Wooden shield
Explorer's Pack
Spell component pouch
5 gp

Spells prepared:
Conjure Woodland Beings
Conjure Animals
Spike Growth
Pass without Trace
Enhance Ability
Goodberry
Detect Magic
Thunderwave
Absorb Elements

Cantrips:
Guidance
Mold Earth
Magic Stone


Combat statistics:
AC 16
HP 59
To hit: +5 (+6 with Magic Stone)
Save DC: 14

Quickbuild so I hope I didn't forget anything.

[Unoriginal]

Okay, mechanical character write-up. You wanted level 7? Well, I guess I'll just level-up the stuff I posted here earlier:

Spoiler: Shepherd of Mielikki

Show

Class: Druid (Shepherd) 7

Race: Variant Human (Damaran)
Name: Gierdre Baltakis, the White-Eyed
Age: 35
Height: 5'5''
Weight: 110lb

Background: Far Traveler
Alignment: Neutral good
Deity: Mielikki Bluecloak, Mistress of the Woods

Personality trait: I begin my day with small traditional rituals that are unfamiliar to those around me (worship of the great bear, the master of the forest, a gift to the lady, and every 30 day the Song of Trees)
Ideal: Inquisitive
Bond: My freedom is my most precious possession. I'll never let anyone take it from me again.
Flaw: I pretend not to understand the local language in order to avoid interactions I would rather not have.

Spoiler: Point buy

Show

Str 8
Dex 14
Con 14 (+1 race +1 Res: Con)
Int 8
Wis 15 (+1 race)
Cha 12

Feats/ASIs:
1. Lucky
4. Resilient: Constitution

Final stats:
Str 8
Dex 14
Con 16
Int 8
Wis 16
Cha 12

Skill proficiencies:
Stealth
Perception
Insight
Persuasion
Investigation

Tool proficiencies:
Dragonchess

Languages:
Common
Damaran
Sylvan

Items:
Traveler's clothes
Dragonchess set
Pearl necklace (10gp)
Quarterstaff
Sling
Pebbles (50)
Breastplate
Wooden shield
Explorer's Pack
5 gp

Spells prepared:
Conjure Woodland Beings
Conjure Animals
Spike Growth
Pass without Trace
Enhance Ability
Goodberry
Detect Magic
Thunderwave
Absorb Elements

Cantrips:
Guidance
Mold Earth
Magic Stone


Combat statistics:
AC 18
HP 59
To hit: +5
Save DC: 14

Quickbuild so I hope I didn't forget anything.

I assume the breastplate is not made of metal, am I correct?

[Eldariel]

I assume the breastplate is not made of metal, am I correct?

Mielikki's followers can use metal but I don't think it makes overtly much difference.

[Dork_Forge]

I assume the breastplate is not made of metal, am I correct?

As the DM of the scenario, I don't remember off the top of my head: does the module present an opportunity to get non metal Breastplate, given that it's PHB description is explicitly metal?

Also worth noting that shield and quarterstaff have a high chance of clashing with the playstyle presented before.

Mielikki's followers can use metal but I don't think it makes overtly much difference.

Where does that tidbit come from? The mentions of her in the PHB and SCAG don't mention it.

[Eldariel]

As the DM of the scenario, I don't remember off the top of my head: does the module present an opportunity to get non metal Breastplate, given that it's PHB description is explicitly metal?

Also worth noting that shield and quarterstaff have a high chance of clashing with the playstyle presented before.

Quarterstaff is not used. It's just something in the starting package and not sold. Fighting is not intended; the build doesn't even have Shillelagh. It's basically Shield and a free hand.

Where does that tidbit come from? The mentions of her in the PHB and SCAG don't mention it.

Ah. Hmm, that might be a 3eism that didn't get ported over. Okay, make it a Hide armor so we can avoid this debacle.

[Dork_Forge]

Quarterstaff is not used. It's just something in the starting package and not sold. Fighting is not intended; the build doesn't even have Shillelagh. It's basically Shield and a free hand.

The build also doesn't have a component pouch, I assumed you were using it as a focus.

Ah. Hmm, that might be a 3eism that didn't get ported over. Okay, make it a Hide armor so we can avoid this debacle.

Seems to be the case.

[Eldariel]

The build also doesn't have a component pouch, I assumed you were using it as a focus.

Added. Thanks.

[Unoriginal]

Sorry for the lack of responses, I lost track of this thread.


Is it ok if we do that with only one thread in the OOC section of the Play-by-Post subforum? That way we can have everything in one place.

[Eldariel]

Sorry for the lack of responses, I lost track of this thread.


Is it ok if we do that with only one thread in the OOC section of the Play-by-Post subforum? That way we can have everything in one place.

Sure, as long as we can roll nothing else matters, really.

[Eldariel]

If you already created a thread, can you link it here, please? So I know what I'm looking for.