Hmmm, Fighter @ 17 gets a 2nd Action Surge. Ranger gets absolutely nothing @ 17 with Scout coming up the best - another attack AND Sneak Attack every round in optimal circumstances. I think my biggest regret about not sticking with Ranger is the lack of Volley.
My plan is to eek out THREE more ASIs by finishing off with 6 levels of Fighter, including Elven Accuracy and Crossbow Expert. With one left, I'm not sure but really leaning towards Lucky; although Mobile fits the theme & Alert would give a big boost to Initiative and prevent being Surprised. Someone in the party currently has a Weapon of Warning, so the last one really isn't as helpful anymore.
I think most melee "lose power" vs. a pure caster at higher levels. Melee of course can slog on as long as they have hit points.
Not sure where your theoretical Bard is getting the legendary/sentient Moonblade from...but that IS very nice. Is the +1d6 Thunder damage all the time or vs. one creature type? I'm curious how you would do lots of damage with a weapon of any kind; with a Long bow you might have 1d8+8 with an additional d6 vs. one creature type twice a round? Efreeti chain mail is decent, but puts your AC at 19 without anything else as you can't use any Dex bonus to AC. 21 if you have a shield, though that'd greatly limit the weapons your Moonblade shapes.
A Tarrasque would be interesting to fight, if outside (I've never fought one inside before) then the Boots of Flying (the item I rolled up my character with...was allowed to pick one Uncommon) would give me a very good defense since it has no ranged attack. Just Frightful Presence and once you save vs. that, you're good. It DOES have some distinct magic resists and Legendary Saves not to mention Reflective Carapace. Should have 3 attacks a round with +14 to hit so the AC of 25 is doable, particularly if I can gain Advantage and roll 3d20 thrice. That isn't easy to do while flying way, way up in the air though as there's usually no hiding spots. For me, think it'd be a pretty boring fight & my biggest problem might be running out of arrows/bolts. Of course, not sure how the rest of the party would be doing....probably half the party Swallowed & the other remainder dead/fleeing from its massive attacks.
QFT
"A Tarrasque would be interesting to fight" : Yes, use of the word "would" implies hypothetical. Obviously. You then go on to detail what might be the outcome of this fight but neglect to mention that this hypothetical fight is happening in some hypothetical future where you have followed a particular path of hypothetical upgrades without managing to acquire any magic items, which at this point you probably believe are hypothetical to you. Obviously.
Don't shoot the messenger - I'm only pointing out what others are thinking.
Sorry about the bold text - I couldn't un-bold it on this editor!
TBH, a level 1 with a method of flying and a magic ranged weapon can take out a 5E Tarrasque. It'd just take a very, very long time & a lot of arrows/bolts. Previous versions of the Tarrasque included regeneration (and other nasty things), which the 5E doesn't have.
My "hypothetical build" is no different than the poster with the Moonblade, Efreeti Chainmail and Iron Flask (who I was replying to). If anything, I AM very close to 16, with 17 not too far off and I'll have those 2 Feats and the extra +1 to hit.
Our party is working towards the end of the Krynn/Ansalon Age of Mortals/Spectre of Sorrow 3.5 campaign which is just bursting with tons of Monty Haul magic items. As it is, our DM is manually converting the campaign to 5E and hand picking what magic items are loot.
If you look back at my original post and take our party's Paladin as an example, even with a +2 to hit Sun Blade, he only has +8 to hit. The party's Barbarian only has +8 to hit. These are our 2 "tanks". If the DM wants our Tanks to be able to hit at all, the mob's AC must be rather low. Mob has a low AC, incoming Sharpshooter/Precise Shot.
The DM is loathe to give me any other magic items, because a vast majority of magic items help in combat...which I really don't need help with offense wise. There are still some defensive and OOC items that wouldn't change things too much at all.
Like I've said before, other players do their roles and I do mine; a party effort. When it comes to party loot though, there hasn't been anything "given" out by the DM I can use and if I try to spend gold to buy a magic item, it's denied. Other players are being given items via loot or gold purchase to "bring them up to speed" with my dps, so dps is being used as a metric for party loot.
So my choices seem limited, squeeze every single drop of power out my build and continue on without magic items or sandbag and hope I get access to better magic items. There WAS a poster that said, "pass gold to another player and have them buy equipment for you." TBH, that seems like my best option ATM. Do I want Studded Leather +1? Have another character get it for me.
I've even asked if I can buy magic items for other characters. "Any Boots of Speed for my Rogue friend? How about Bracers of Defense for our Monk?" Denied, every time. At this point, I'm wondering WHY I even have gold at all. Granted, I did sorta "appropriate" some of that gold/money from party loot...before it was split between the party members. No party members should know about that, and the DM shouldn't change the magic loot because I palmed a gem from the party 7 levels ago, right? Right? Oh, and took first picks from a Behir's lair....luckily there's a Kender in the party and if anything goes missing, it was her!
In short, I want my character to "grow" by means other than my class progression & feats.
*disclaimer, this isn't about role-playing I am or am not doing, not about skills, not about doing things with "style and flair" (some players have asked me NOT to do "style and flair, as it is just so....selfish with 7-8 players). It's not about campaign story progression. People/players can make an effective build AND do all those other things, they're not mutually exclusive (barring interactions that revolve around Charisma checks). The DM does a decent job of running the campaign otherwise and I can give examples where we've done little but role-play/puzzle solve many a session
I'll give a RP example from Saturday night. Rogue steals a book from the Solinari Tower of High Sorcery. Lots of the other players were, "You can't do that. Stop. That's not right. Put it back." Me, "Just replace the book with something from your (Kender) pouches, that should be a fair trade. Otherwise that'd be stealing."
Regardless of anything else, D&D has always been guided by the principal of kill the monsters, steal their treasure, stab your buddy. Or is that Munchkin? Which is a parody of the D&D ethos.
The desire to get better gear and skills to fight bigger monsters and get better gear and skills is the driving force behind the game. Some people may be 'All about the story' and that is fine, but the loot-drive is a microcosm of the American Way. Go to school, get good grades, get a good job, rent your own place, buy a stereo, work hard, get a promotion, earn more, buy your own house, have kids, 'oh my god I have no money and no space!', work even harder, get a promotion, get more money, get a bigger house, kids leave home, wife gets a job, put some money away for a rainy day, buy a yacht, buy a guard crocodile for the yacht, travel the world, get bigger guns to deal with Somali Pirates, steal the Somali's blood diamonds.......
OK, deep breath, I'm getting carried away again. If you aren't constantly looking for better gear and bigger fights, then you just aren't fully engaged in the experience.
I would still love to hear from your DM. If you are already doing 20+ damage per shot, what's an extra D6 on top of that? (About 20%, actually) Or cut that down to +D6 VS draconians. Or +D6 vs uninjured draconians....It might shut you up for a level or two. :) Big grin.
Personally I wouldn't put up with it. This isn't Star Wars Battlefront II where I have to buy the good stuff (Or a chance at the good stuff!)
As for that Tarrasque - after a dozen arrows thunk into its butt, I'm guessing it's going to start burrowing - I'm guessing your arrows don't have deep-drill or earth-phasing abilities. Oh, and it was awakened early by an ambitious high-mage of Nuitari who DOES have access to flying and ranged spells and a black dragon or two.......
Your DM should investigate Greek Mythology, or TL:DR "Those the Gods would destroy, first they make proud" or something.
If you aren't constantly looking for better gear and bigger fights, then you just aren't fully engaged in the experience.
Do you know what the term 'raspberry' means when referring to a sound made by the mouth? Because I respond to this particular thought with a loud, and deliberately prolonged, raspberry.
If you aren't constantly looking for better gear and bigger fights, then you just aren't fully engaged in the experience.
Do you know what the term 'raspberry' means when referring to a sound made by the mouth? Because I respond to this particular thought with a loud, and deliberately prolonged, raspberry.
As for that Tarrasque - after a dozen arrows thunk into its butt, I'm guessing it's going to start burrowing - I'm guessing your arrows don't have deep-drill or earth-phasing abilities.
Sorry, the 5E Tarrasque doesn't have Burrow or a dig speed. Maybe you're thinking of a prior edition?
So, a very low level archer with movement and a magic ranged weapon, can eventually wear a Tarrasque down. My character being able to do that is just par for the course because of the watered down version of a 3E mob. I might even be able to do the encounter without flying....not because my guy is OP, but because the 5E Tarrasque has a vulnerability.
Edit: The DM isn't going to take much of a look at Greek mythology, there's already a (Dragonlance) mythology set up.
The vulnerability of which you speak is not unique to the Tarrasque, nor to 5th edition.
All things are vulnerable to deliberately lop-sided white-room theorycraft scenarios that lack most of the details that would be part of an in-game scenario. Like why the creature is there, what it is trying to accomplish, and any and all actions that the creature can take despite them not being codified in its stat block because they are assumed (by the game design, at least) to be performable by any creature with appropriate physical structure to perform them
Most notably in this case, that the Tarrasque is Godzilla, and even if that stat block says otherwise, it's got laser breath. what's atomic breath in 5th? Necromantic? Radiant?
I'd have to go with necromantic. The whole flesh melting and sloughing off, or longer term issues like respiratory issues, glowing in the dark, turning invisible, growing to a freakish size...(Yeah, every thing I know about Nukular stuff comes from Homer.)
If you want to have nuclear shadows left on the wall, perhaps the radiance is coming from the Tarrasque's eyes.
The best way to defend against the Tarrasque breath weapon is a 1950's refridgerator or a Shield Of Wolverines.
When my players roll up characters, I have them roll multiple sets of stats. I then review them and eliminate ones that are too powerful or too weak. Then, they are free to choose from the remaining stats. Sounds like you DM didn't review the characters or supervise the creation process?
Most notably in this case, that the Tarrasque is Godzilla, and even if that stat block says otherwise, it's got laser breath. what's atomic breath in 5th? Necromantic? Radiant?
Radiant. Spells like Sickening Radiance seem to still be radiant damage, despite including things like radiation sickness type effects.
When my players roll up characters, I have them roll multiple sets of stats. I then review them and eliminate ones that are too powerful or too weak. Then, they are free to choose from the remaining stats. Sounds like you DM didn't review the characters or supervise the creation process?
We used a point-buy. There was no rolling. IMO, that means nobody can say, "Sure my character sucks, look how I rolled for stats! Steve lucked out and got such good stats...no wonder he's dominating the game. My guy suicides so I can re-roll."
Review the characters creation process? He laid down character creation rules and guidelines. I'm pretty sure he didn't veto a single thing, because everyone has the same rules and guidelines. Then again, I don't have privy to his private conversations with other players. He DID give me some leway on languages. As a Ranger, I proposed that Druidic might be available....he said sure, sacrifice two languages for Druid.
any and all actions that the creature can take despite them not being codified in its stat block because they are assumed (by the game design, at least) to be performable by any creature with appropriate physical structure to perform them
Players, NPCs and most animals can dig a hole. It would just be slow and nowhere near their movement speed. The Tarrasque in particular does double damage to buildings/structures/objects. He could do quite a bit of damage to the ground...."The Tarrasque hits the ground in rapid succession and makes a big crater about 10 to 15' deep. He's continuing to dig, but as he's a Gigantic creature, its going to take him a bit to just get his butt under earth."
Most people don't care WHY the Tarrasque is there, its a force of nature bent on destruction. It has to be stopped, if possible. It's trying to accomplish....large scale destruction. Stop it ASAP unless there's a Mage nearby with some magic item trying to control the T-dog. If so, then stop that Mage.
One of the points of the game is that you shouldn't dwell too much on "Well, if this was real life....this would happen." If you do, then players will start imparting "realism" into the game as well. "I hit that ogre and his flying mount with a fireball, did the mount's wings take damage? What about the harness, saddle, bit and bridle? It's just leather....it took enough damage to burn away to nothing. Look at leather's hardness and hps!". Game would slow to a crawl.
Yes, its a "white-room" theory and it should be treated as such. Which was part of my point. Are we outside, I have a distinct advantage. Is the Tarrasque in a tight tunnel, then that's a different story. Just because some situations allow me to do good combat damage and others struggle, doesn't mean I should get less loot. Sometimes our Sorcerer does incredible damage. At times, the Monk shines. Other combats, our Rogue just totally rocks. Our War Cleric has at times, turned the tide of battle. Paladin totally rocks at times, particularly vs. Undead and Fiends. Barbarian runs in, does a bit of damage but gives everyone Advantage to his nearby foes. He's all mad and raging, maybe even Recklessly.....they focus on him, other players pick off his targets (but not me, because I don't get Advantage on that!).
A DM shouldn't use damage output in combat as a metric for who gets magic items BECAUSE sometimes the situations are lop-sided. There's more to the game than combat and killshots and who got off a good Chain Lightning.
One of the points of the game is that you shouldn't dwell too much on "Well, if this was real life....this would happen."
That is extremely far away from anything I've ever said on the topic of the game of D&D. Well, to be clear, the point you ascribing to me and then arguing against is what's far away from my thoughts on the matter - as my thoughts on the matter of trying to use "realism" in D&D is "Yeah, that's not gonna work out how you want it to. So better to just not do it."
Yes, its a "white-room" theory and it should be treated as such.
When you say "a very low level archer with movement and a magic ranged weapon, can eventually wear a Tarrasque down." the thing that you are doing in making that statement is failing to treat a white-room theory as a white-room theory. You are phrasing the white-room theory as a thing that is actually true in a practical application - which it, incidentally, is not for a wide variety of reasons including but not limited to the details of the scenario itself just not really ever being as described in the theory outside of the circumstances literally being some DM and their player intentionally "proving" their theory to be correct.
A DM shouldn't use damage output in combat as a metric for who gets magic items BECAUSE sometimes the situations are lop-sided. There's more to the game than combat and killshots and who got off a good Chain Lightning.
Something I thought of the other day while discussing this particular thread with my play group, and thought I'd introduce as an idea to this thread:
Have you considered that the DM thinks that you'd not be happy with whatever magic items they did decide to hand out unless they enhance your character's already prodigious ability to deal damage? I mean, in this thread you've said that you'd be happy with non-combat-influencing items, but have you explicitly told your DM that exact thing? Because when a player builds a character and goes out of their way to squeeze more of one particular aspect of the game out of that character, even to the detriment of other aspects, it communicates to others that the player cares about that aspect of the game more than all the other aspects - so if you haven't explicitly said "I just want to have some magical knick-knack so I don't feel left out, like an alchemy jug or a cap of water breathing or something minor like that" or the like, your DM might think you are asking for just the one thing you really don't need, and saying no because of that.
I know you've been following this thread for a while AaronOfBarbaria.
Did you miss the party where I asked if buying magic items for other players would be possible? Denied.
Again, not sure why I have gold now at all. Other players say, "Omg, how do you have so much gold?" It's because I can't spend it! They're all broke and poor, but have nice magic items they were able to buy.
My thought on this is to steal as much gold from the party as I can so when the DM says, "Yes, the shop in town found what you want but it'll be 26K gold! Muahahahaha!". I'll just reply, "K, I have that. Give me the Studded Leather +1." Or I could slip 8k to the party Rogue and ask he to buy a set for way less....
In the end, my character has a ton of gold...for absolutely no reason. "Why does your character weigh so much, my harpy should be able to carry you off easily. No way you weigh 160 lbs. You're an elf with light weapons., DM. "I have too much coin on me, otherwise I'd weigh a lot less", Me. 5E says every 50 coins is a pound, I have a lot of coins.".
I know you've been following this thread for a while AaronOfBarbaria.
Did you miss the party where I asked if buying magic items for other players would be possible? Denied.
I must have missed you mentioning asking to buy stuff for other players... however, that's not actually answering what I just asked you. The DM could easily have been saying "no" to you asking to buy stuff for other players because they thought you meant you were going to buy them combat-potency-enhancing items since you seem to be primarily focused on combat performance.
So the question still stands: have you explicitly asked for items that don't compliment your already potent build?
My thought on this is to steal as much gold from the party as I can so when the DM says, "Yes, the shop in town found what you want but it'll be 26K gold! Muahahahaha!". I'll just reply, "K, I have that. Give me the Studded Leather +1."
I don't know if you are self aware of this or not, but when your response to not initially getting your way is to think of a way to "trick" someone into you getting your way, it makes it seem even more likely that you are being denied your way with good reason.
Either way, I'll just offer the advice that you not take what is already obviously an issue and intentionally make the situation worse by behaving in a petty way.
I thank you for your input. Any chance you could just ignore this thread? You just seem to miss all the blatant and obvious points and aren't really making constructive comments.
From now on, I'm just going to Ignore your comments. Have a great weekend. K?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Roleplaying since Runequest.
I would like to be given a shot at Tyson Fury. I could KO him within 5 rounds.
Roleplaying since Runequest.
TBH, a level 1 with a method of flying and a magic ranged weapon can take out a 5E Tarrasque. It'd just take a very, very long time & a lot of arrows/bolts. Previous versions of the Tarrasque included regeneration (and other nasty things), which the 5E doesn't have.
My "hypothetical build" is no different than the poster with the Moonblade, Efreeti Chainmail and Iron Flask (who I was replying to). If anything, I AM very close to 16, with 17 not too far off and I'll have those 2 Feats and the extra +1 to hit.
Our party is working towards the end of the Krynn/Ansalon Age of Mortals/Spectre of Sorrow 3.5 campaign which is just bursting with tons of Monty Haul magic items. As it is, our DM is manually converting the campaign to 5E and hand picking what magic items are loot.
If you look back at my original post and take our party's Paladin as an example, even with a +2 to hit Sun Blade, he only has +8 to hit. The party's Barbarian only has +8 to hit. These are our 2 "tanks". If the DM wants our Tanks to be able to hit at all, the mob's AC must be rather low. Mob has a low AC, incoming Sharpshooter/Precise Shot.
The DM is loathe to give me any other magic items, because a vast majority of magic items help in combat...which I really don't need help with offense wise. There are still some defensive and OOC items that wouldn't change things too much at all.
Like I've said before, other players do their roles and I do mine; a party effort. When it comes to party loot though, there hasn't been anything "given" out by the DM I can use and if I try to spend gold to buy a magic item, it's denied. Other players are being given items via loot or gold purchase to "bring them up to speed" with my dps, so dps is being used as a metric for party loot.
So my choices seem limited, squeeze every single drop of power out my build and continue on without magic items or sandbag and hope I get access to better magic items. There WAS a poster that said, "pass gold to another player and have them buy equipment for you." TBH, that seems like my best option ATM. Do I want Studded Leather +1? Have another character get it for me.
I've even asked if I can buy magic items for other characters. "Any Boots of Speed for my Rogue friend? How about Bracers of Defense for our Monk?" Denied, every time. At this point, I'm wondering WHY I even have gold at all. Granted, I did sorta "appropriate" some of that gold/money from party loot...before it was split between the party members. No party members should know about that, and the DM shouldn't change the magic loot because I palmed a gem from the party 7 levels ago, right? Right? Oh, and took first picks from a Behir's lair....luckily there's a Kender in the party and if anything goes missing, it was her!
In short, I want my character to "grow" by means other than my class progression & feats.
*disclaimer, this isn't about role-playing I am or am not doing, not about skills, not about doing things with "style and flair" (some players have asked me NOT to do "style and flair, as it is just so....selfish with 7-8 players). It's not about campaign story progression. People/players can make an effective build AND do all those other things, they're not mutually exclusive (barring interactions that revolve around Charisma checks). The DM does a decent job of running the campaign otherwise and I can give examples where we've done little but role-play/puzzle solve many a session
I'll give a RP example from Saturday night. Rogue steals a book from the Solinari Tower of High Sorcery. Lots of the other players were, "You can't do that. Stop. That's not right. Put it back." Me, "Just replace the book with something from your (Kender) pouches, that should be a fair trade. Otherwise that'd be stealing."
She put 5 buttons back on the bookshelf.
Regardless of anything else, D&D has always been guided by the principal of kill the monsters, steal their treasure, stab your buddy. Or is that Munchkin?
Which is a parody of the D&D ethos.
The desire to get better gear and skills to fight bigger monsters and get better gear and skills is the driving force behind the game. Some people may be 'All about the story' and that is fine, but the loot-drive is a microcosm of the American Way. Go to school, get good grades, get a good job, rent your own place, buy a stereo, work hard, get a promotion, earn more, buy your own house, have kids, 'oh my god I have no money and no space!', work even harder, get a promotion, get more money, get a bigger house, kids leave home, wife gets a job, put some money away for a rainy day, buy a yacht, buy a guard crocodile for the yacht, travel the world, get bigger guns to deal with Somali Pirates, steal the Somali's blood diamonds.......
OK, deep breath, I'm getting carried away again.
If you aren't constantly looking for better gear and bigger fights, then you just aren't fully engaged in the experience.
I would still love to hear from your DM. If you are already doing 20+ damage per shot, what's an extra D6 on top of that? (About 20%, actually) Or cut that down to +D6 VS draconians. Or +D6 vs uninjured draconians....It might shut you up for a level or two. :) Big grin.
Personally I wouldn't put up with it. This isn't Star Wars Battlefront II where I have to buy the good stuff (Or a chance at the good stuff!)
As for that Tarrasque - after a dozen arrows thunk into its butt, I'm guessing it's going to start burrowing - I'm guessing your arrows don't have deep-drill or earth-phasing abilities. Oh, and it was awakened early by an ambitious high-mage of Nuitari who DOES have access to flying and ranged spells and a black dragon or two.......
Your DM should investigate Greek Mythology, or TL:DR "Those the Gods would destroy, first they make proud" or something.
Roleplaying since Runequest.
Do you know what the term 'raspberry' means when referring to a sound made by the mouth? Because I respond to this particular thought with a loud, and deliberately prolonged, raspberry.
Second big grin of day for me. :D
Roleplaying since Runequest.
OK - I'm new to this 5th Edition, so bear with me.
The Tarrasque can no longer burrow?
Cats no longer have dark vision? (Thanks to FullMetalBunny for that information.)
Orcs still fart though, right?
I tell you, I thought it was just our world going crazy!
At least Drow are still Evil; I really worried that was going to be changed.
Edit: I could see the arguments for cats losing darkvision, but the owl retains it.....
Roleplaying since Runequest.
The vulnerability of which you speak is not unique to the Tarrasque, nor to 5th edition.
All things are vulnerable to deliberately lop-sided white-room theorycraft scenarios that lack most of the details that would be part of an in-game scenario. Like why the creature is there, what it is trying to accomplish, and any and all actions that the creature can take despite them not being codified in its stat block because they are assumed (by the game design, at least) to be performable by any creature with appropriate physical structure to perform them
Most notably in this case, that the Tarrasque is Godzilla, and even if that stat block says otherwise, it's got laser breath. what's atomic breath in 5th? Necromantic? Radiant?
I'd have to go with necromantic. The whole flesh melting and sloughing off, or longer term issues like respiratory issues, glowing in the dark, turning invisible, growing to a freakish size...(Yeah, every thing I know about Nukular stuff comes from Homer.)
If you want to have nuclear shadows left on the wall, perhaps the radiance is coming from the Tarrasque's eyes.
The best way to defend against the Tarrasque breath weapon is a 1950's refridgerator or a Shield Of Wolverines.
Roleplaying since Runequest.
When my players roll up characters, I have them roll multiple sets of stats. I then review them and eliminate ones that are too powerful or too weak. Then, they are free to choose from the remaining stats. Sounds like you DM didn't review the characters or supervise the creation process?
That is extremely far away from anything I've ever said on the topic of the game of D&D. Well, to be clear, the point you ascribing to me and then arguing against is what's far away from my thoughts on the matter - as my thoughts on the matter of trying to use "realism" in D&D is "Yeah, that's not gonna work out how you want it to. So better to just not do it."
When you say "a very low level archer with movement and a magic ranged weapon, can eventually wear a Tarrasque down." the thing that you are doing in making that statement is failing to treat a white-room theory as a white-room theory. You are phrasing the white-room theory as a thing that is actually true in a practical application - which it, incidentally, is not for a wide variety of reasons including but not limited to the details of the scenario itself just not really ever being as described in the theory outside of the circumstances literally being some DM and their player intentionally "proving" their theory to be correct.
Something I thought of the other day while discussing this particular thread with my play group, and thought I'd introduce as an idea to this thread:Have you considered that the DM thinks that you'd not be happy with whatever magic items they did decide to hand out unless they enhance your character's already prodigious ability to deal damage? I mean, in this thread you've said that you'd be happy with non-combat-influencing items, but have you explicitly told your DM that exact thing? Because when a player builds a character and goes out of their way to squeeze more of one particular aspect of the game out of that character, even to the detriment of other aspects, it communicates to others that the player cares about that aspect of the game more than all the other aspects - so if you haven't explicitly said "I just want to have some magical knick-knack so I don't feel left out, like an alchemy jug or a cap of water breathing or something minor like that" or the like, your DM might think you are asking for just the one thing you really don't need, and saying no because of that.
I know you've been following this thread for a while AaronOfBarbaria.
Did you miss the party where I asked if buying magic items for other players would be possible? Denied.
Again, not sure why I have gold now at all. Other players say, "Omg, how do you have so much gold?" It's because I can't spend it! They're all broke and poor, but have nice magic items they were able to buy.
My thought on this is to steal as much gold from the party as I can so when the DM says, "Yes, the shop in town found what you want but it'll be 26K gold! Muahahahaha!". I'll just reply, "K, I have that. Give me the Studded Leather +1." Or I could slip 8k to the party Rogue and ask he to buy a set for way less....
In the end, my character has a ton of gold...for absolutely no reason. "Why does your character weigh so much, my harpy should be able to carry you off easily. No way you weigh 160 lbs. You're an elf with light weapons., DM. "I have too much coin on me, otherwise I'd weigh a lot less", Me. 5E says every 50 coins is a pound, I have a lot of coins.".
I must have missed you mentioning asking to buy stuff for other players... however, that's not actually answering what I just asked you. The DM could easily have been saying "no" to you asking to buy stuff for other players because they thought you meant you were going to buy them combat-potency-enhancing items since you seem to be primarily focused on combat performance.
So the question still stands: have you explicitly asked for items that don't compliment your already potent build?
I don't know if you are self aware of this or not, but when your response to not initially getting your way is to think of a way to "trick" someone into you getting your way, it makes it seem even more likely that you are being denied your way with good reason.Either way, I'll just offer the advice that you not take what is already obviously an issue and intentionally make the situation worse by behaving in a petty way.
AaronOfBarbaria,
I thank you for your input. Any chance you could just ignore this thread? You just seem to miss all the blatant and obvious points and aren't really making constructive comments.
From now on, I'm just going to Ignore your comments. Have a great weekend. K?