I am about to start my very first game this weekend, so I have been reviewing my character sheet. I have noticed in the bonus action field that I seem to be able to use Two-Weapon fighting. According to Google and some posts I have seen, I am not supposed to have the ability to do so. I also can't seem to find any place on the DNDB character where I would have picked up said ability.
I don't plan on using it, as I will be picking up GWM as soon as I can to go along with the Vengeance Oath, but I just wanted to make sure the character creator didn't screw something up. Could anyone confirm that everything is fine, or if I have made a mistake somewhere along the way?
PS: If you see anything else that might be an issue, let me know. Again, I plan on going Vengeance on level 3, together with GWM for a more damage oriented build.
nothing wrong, every character has the option if they have two weapons. thing is, unless you have the fighting style (whihc paladins don't), you won't add your prof mod to your off-hand weapon.
nothing wrong, every character has the option if they have two weapons. thing is, unless you have the fighting style (whihc paladins don't), you won't add your prof mod to your off-hand weapon.
Hey, thanks a lot. I must have confused it with the prof mod feat from the fighter I test-built. I wasn't aware it was the second weapon that triggered the bonus action! Thank you!
You know GWM isn't going to work with that hammer, right? Well, the first part would, but not the second part. To use the second part, you need a weapon with the "heavy" property, which means a two-handed one, which means dropping the shield. (Just using your warhammer two-handed doesn't count, by RAW. The weapon needs to have the heavy tag). So a maul could do it for you, but not a warhammer.
And while GWM can be a good feat, for your first asi, you'll probably get more mileage out of a +1 each to str and cha. Less sexy, but it will come up much more often (every attack roll, damage roll, and spell save DC), not only for you, but for your whole party (at least those with 10 feet of you) getting another +1 to saves.
You know GWM isn't going to work with that hammer, right? Well, the first part would, but not the second part. To use the second part, you need a weapon with the "heavy" property, which means a two-handed one, which means dropping the shield. (Just using your warhammer two-handed doesn't count, by RAW. The weapon needs to have the heavy tag). So a maul could do it for you, but not a warhammer.
And while GWM can be a good feat, for your first asi, you'll probably get more mileage out of a +1 each to str and cha. Less sexy, but it will come up much more often (every attack roll, damage roll, and spell save DC), not only for you, but for your whole party (at least those with 10 feet of you) getting another +1 to saves.
Gonna have to hard disagree here! GWM is an excellent first choice for your ASI, and here's why:
By level 4, chances are high he'll gain access to a +1 weapon by then, if not earlier, or 5 the latest. Going off the popular GWM heuristic formula, even with a +3 mod in his STR, you're actually doing more damage leaving GWM on all the time save for moments you're up against targets with an AC of 18 or higher, even when you account for the misses.
The advantage given by vow of enmity cancels out the accuracy penalty, meaning OoV paladins benefit more from GWM than a STR increase.
It will be a long while until he'll gain access to GWM if he choses STR to increase, which is notable because a campaign may end before that point, and you get a bigger emotional payout from using GWM.
By selecting GWM, he is also opening up the opportunity to access a strength belt, so an ASI is less likely to feel like a waste if he icnreased STR only to later get a hill giant strength belt.
Plus, paladins have access to the bless spell to help counteract the accuracy penalty even further. There's little reason to NOT take it.
The prevalence of magic items is highly campaign dependent, and by no means guaranteed. I’m not going to argue the math, and just assume you’re right. But as a new player, or an older one not metagaming, how is the OP going to have any idea of an enemy’s AC? And there’s a lot more to the game than damage output. The +1 to saves will help him and potentially a large portion of the party.
Either way, the bigger issue is the choice of weapon, which was the main thrust of my comment.
The prevalence of magic items is highly campaign dependent, and by no means guaranteed. I’m not going to argue the math, and just assume you’re right. But as a new player, or an older one not metagaming, how is the OP going to have any idea of an enemy’s AC? And there’s a lot more to the game than damage output. The +1 to saves will help him and potentially a large portion of the party.
Either way, the bigger issue is the choice of weapon, which was the main thrust of my comment.
Majority of the time, your enemies will NOT be rocking that high an AC. They'll come up from time to time, but more often than not it's below that. If and when he goes up against those targets, he just toggles GWM off, and he's now more effective than before. No harm, no foul.
Now, the +1 to saves is valid, perfectly so, but he's got a +3 at the moment (or more accurately nothing since he doesn't have his aura yet) and that's going to serve him and his party just fine and dandy. Investing for the future for a mundane boost in numerical performance isn't as appealing as whacking something really hard like going with the gamble and seeing that big number pop out. At least, not to me personally. Now, if his CHA was at a +2 mod, with say 15, along with his 17 str, then I'd be more inclined because something's lagging a bit behind for my taste, and he should take the ASI instead. But a +3 aura is very adequate.
Mathematically speaking, an ASI or GWM actually do more or less the same amount when you don't account for advantage. Including it, GWM takes the cake all the way.
You know GWM isn't going to work with that hammer, right? Well, the first part would, but not the second part. To use the second part, you need a weapon with the "heavy" property, which means a two-handed one, which means dropping the shield. (Just using your warhammer two-handed doesn't count, by RAW. The weapon needs to have the heavy tag). So a maul could do it for you, but not a warhammer.
And while GWM can be a good feat, for your first asi, you'll probably get more mileage out of a +1 each to str and cha. Less sexy, but it will come up much more often (every attack roll, damage roll, and spell save DC), not only for you, but for your whole party (at least those with 10 feet of you) getting another +1 to saves.
Thanks a lot for the heads up, that's a very valid point. I will probably still be going for the GWM for the mentioned reasons by @cgarciao, but having to pay attention to the mentioned weapon weight is a great point that I will have to switch up before I start using the character. I will probably try and go for a maul instead.
The original plan was to use the versatility Hammer with the shield before I get to level 2 / 3 and then put away the shield for a 2-handed use. But since that alone is not sufficient, I will have to re-pick a weapon.
Anyway, yours and cgarciao's input is very appreciated!
The prevalence of magic items is highly campaign dependent, and by no means guaranteed. I’m not going to argue the math, and just assume you’re right. But as a new player, or an older one not metagaming, how is the OP going to have any idea of an enemy’s AC? And there’s a lot more to the game than damage output. The +1 to saves will help him and potentially a large portion of the party.
Either way, the bigger issue is the choice of weapon, which was the main thrust of my comment.
Majority of the time, your enemies will NOT be rocking that high an AC. They'll come up from time to time, but more often than not it's below that. If and when he goes up against those targets, he just toggles GWM off, and he's now more effective than before. No harm, no foul.
Now, the +1 to saves is valid, perfectly so, but he's got a +3 at the moment (or more accurately nothing since he doesn't have his aura yet) and that's going to serve him and his party just fine and dandy. Investing for the future for a mundane boost in numerical performance isn't as appealing as whacking something really hard like going with the gamble and seeing that big number pop out. At least, not to me personally. Now, if his CHA was at a +2 mod, with say 15, along with his 17 str, then I'd be more inclined because something's lagging a bit behind for my taste, and he should take the ASI instead. But a +3 aura is very adequate.
Mathematically speaking, an ASI or GWM actually do more or less the same amount when you don't account for advantage. Including it, GWM takes the cake all the way.
Again, I’m sure your right on the damage math, but again, there’s more to the game than damage. GWM won’t help on athletics checks, or grapple checks or strength saves (granted these are so rare its barely worth mentioning, but they do happen once in a blue moon). And the cha bonus helps with a number of skills, and spell save DCs and number of spells prepared and (again, very rare but they do happen) charisma saves.
So while I’ll take your word that mathematically GWM could be more useful for pushing damage numbers in combat, there’s the whole rest of the game to consider beyond damage output.
Again, I’m sure your right on the damage math, but again, there’s more to the game than damage. GWM won’t help on athletics checks, or grapple checks or strength saves (granted these are so rare its barely worth mentioning, but they do happen once in a blue moon). And the cha bonus helps with a number of skills, and spell save DCs and number of spells prepared and (again, very rare but they do happen) charisma saves.
So while I’ll take your word that mathematically GWM could be more useful for pushing damage numbers in combat, there’s the whole rest of the game to consider beyond damage output.
I think following down this discussion further is something of a rabbit hole that's susceptible to going off on tangents, but here's what I have to say on the matter:
Due to the nature of action economy, grapples are less effective, so it's a niche thing to bring up, situational. Not to say grappling sucks, because I have a glory paladin built to grapple when I took skill expert for expertise in athletics, but there's synergy with the channel divinity and the flavor of the subclass, so it made sense to care about that feature. Not so much in OoV. Athletics, sure, it's a valid point, but you get more mileage out of your proficiency modifier in the long run if you selected it as one of your proficient skills. Otherwise, one point more, one point less, not going to make a whole lot of difference.
Now, CHA. If nothing else, this is where we get into the nitty gritty. On one hand, you mentioned spell save DCs. A handful could argue your spell slots would be better used for smites, whereas I prefer to use them for buffs and utility. But spells that rely on DC are both a gamble and a question in the efficacy of the spell slot. Perhaps better would be to ask about the context. Is the OP in a party with a rogue and a bard? Chances are they'd be the face, so the paladin's CHA for skills is less crucial. Otherwise, if his party comprised of mostly GWM-using martials, then maybe his CHA would be important as probably being the highest, so he's the face by default, and his damage isn't as needed. If he's with dedicated casters, chances are they'll be focused on their spellcasting ability more than anything else and able to control a larger segment of the combat better than the paladin can. But if he's the only dedicated martial, then he needs to be the big melee damage guy in a party that's already got a face and a controller.
I find it quite interesting to see both poinds made, so thanks again. As a complete beginner party, we're still learning. I will be joined by a Hill Dwarf Light Cleric and a Halfling Rogue, so I have instinctively set myself up to be a close range damage dealer and (to some degree) the face of the party, too. Since we will be doing this with only 3 people in the party I figured I might aswell bring along some talking skills.
As for the progression further down, I still wasn't sure if I wanted to get Pole Arm Master too, and switch to an according weapon, but that heavily depends on how I feel about the Maul. Since our Cleric will probably be a bit more defensive to keep things like Bless running, I will probably be the only one that is constantly in the middle of a battle and I have no idea how my survivability will look like. We'll have to see. I will also be digging further into some guides as I go along to see where the build can go. So far I've got it planned out until level 3, when I get to choose my oath and pick some spells.
nothing wrong, every character has the option if they have two weapons. thing is, unless you have the fighting style (whihc paladins don't), you won't add your prof mod to your off-hand weapon.
To be clear, you don't add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus action attack. Not the proficiency bonus (which is only applied during attacks). The fighting style lets you add your ability modifier to the bonus action attack's damage, and has nothing to do with proficiency bonuses
Hey everyone,
I am about to start my very first game this weekend, so I have been reviewing my character sheet. I have noticed in the bonus action field that I seem to be able to use Two-Weapon fighting. According to Google and some posts I have seen, I am not supposed to have the ability to do so. I also can't seem to find any place on the DNDB character where I would have picked up said ability.
I don't plan on using it, as I will be picking up GWM as soon as I can to go along with the Vengeance Oath, but I just wanted to make sure the character creator didn't screw something up. Could anyone confirm that everything is fine, or if I have made a mistake somewhere along the way?
You should be able to see the sheet with this link: http://ddb.ac/characters/47151614/6u1eky
Thank you very much!
PS: If you see anything else that might be an issue, let me know. Again, I plan on going Vengeance on level 3, together with GWM for a more damage oriented build.
nothing wrong, every character has the option if they have two weapons. thing is, unless you have the fighting style (whihc paladins don't), you won't add your prof mod to your off-hand weapon.
Hey, thanks a lot. I must have confused it with the prof mod feat from the fighter I test-built. I wasn't aware it was the second weapon that triggered the bonus action! Thank you!
You know GWM isn't going to work with that hammer, right? Well, the first part would, but not the second part. To use the second part, you need a weapon with the "heavy" property, which means a two-handed one, which means dropping the shield. (Just using your warhammer two-handed doesn't count, by RAW. The weapon needs to have the heavy tag). So a maul could do it for you, but not a warhammer.
And while GWM can be a good feat, for your first asi, you'll probably get more mileage out of a +1 each to str and cha. Less sexy, but it will come up much more often (every attack roll, damage roll, and spell save DC), not only for you, but for your whole party (at least those with 10 feet of you) getting another +1 to saves.
Gonna have to hard disagree here! GWM is an excellent first choice for your ASI, and here's why:
By level 4, chances are high he'll gain access to a +1 weapon by then, if not earlier, or 5 the latest. Going off the popular GWM heuristic formula, even with a +3 mod in his STR, you're actually doing more damage leaving GWM on all the time save for moments you're up against targets with an AC of 18 or higher, even when you account for the misses.
The advantage given by vow of enmity cancels out the accuracy penalty, meaning OoV paladins benefit more from GWM than a STR increase.
It will be a long while until he'll gain access to GWM if he choses STR to increase, which is notable because a campaign may end before that point, and you get a bigger emotional payout from using GWM.
By selecting GWM, he is also opening up the opportunity to access a strength belt, so an ASI is less likely to feel like a waste if he icnreased STR only to later get a hill giant strength belt.
Plus, paladins have access to the bless spell to help counteract the accuracy penalty even further. There's little reason to NOT take it.
The prevalence of magic items is highly campaign dependent, and by no means guaranteed.
I’m not going to argue the math, and just assume you’re right. But as a new player, or an older one not metagaming, how is the OP going to have any idea of an enemy’s AC? And there’s a lot more to the game than damage output. The +1 to saves will help him and potentially a large portion of the party.
Either way, the bigger issue is the choice of weapon, which was the main thrust of my comment.
Majority of the time, your enemies will NOT be rocking that high an AC. They'll come up from time to time, but more often than not it's below that. If and when he goes up against those targets, he just toggles GWM off, and he's now more effective than before. No harm, no foul.
Now, the +1 to saves is valid, perfectly so, but he's got a +3 at the moment (or more accurately nothing since he doesn't have his aura yet) and that's going to serve him and his party just fine and dandy. Investing for the future for a mundane boost in numerical performance isn't as appealing as whacking something really hard like going with the gamble and seeing that big number pop out. At least, not to me personally. Now, if his CHA was at a +2 mod, with say 15, along with his 17 str, then I'd be more inclined because something's lagging a bit behind for my taste, and he should take the ASI instead. But a +3 aura is very adequate.
Mathematically speaking, an ASI or GWM actually do more or less the same amount when you don't account for advantage. Including it, GWM takes the cake all the way.
Thanks a lot for the heads up, that's a very valid point. I will probably still be going for the GWM for the mentioned reasons by @cgarciao, but having to pay attention to the mentioned weapon weight is a great point that I will have to switch up before I start using the character. I will probably try and go for a maul instead.
The original plan was to use the versatility Hammer with the shield before I get to level 2 / 3 and then put away the shield for a 2-handed use. But since that alone is not sufficient, I will have to re-pick a weapon.
Anyway, yours and cgarciao's input is very appreciated!
Again, I’m sure your right on the damage math, but again, there’s more to the game than damage. GWM won’t help on athletics checks, or grapple checks or strength saves (granted these are so rare its barely worth mentioning, but they do happen once in a blue moon). And the cha bonus helps with a number of skills, and spell save DCs and number of spells prepared and (again, very rare but they do happen) charisma saves.
So while I’ll take your word that mathematically GWM could be more useful for pushing damage numbers in combat, there’s the whole rest of the game to consider beyond damage output.
I think following down this discussion further is something of a rabbit hole that's susceptible to going off on tangents, but here's what I have to say on the matter:
Due to the nature of action economy, grapples are less effective, so it's a niche thing to bring up, situational. Not to say grappling sucks, because I have a glory paladin built to grapple when I took skill expert for expertise in athletics, but there's synergy with the channel divinity and the flavor of the subclass, so it made sense to care about that feature. Not so much in OoV. Athletics, sure, it's a valid point, but you get more mileage out of your proficiency modifier in the long run if you selected it as one of your proficient skills. Otherwise, one point more, one point less, not going to make a whole lot of difference.
Now, CHA. If nothing else, this is where we get into the nitty gritty. On one hand, you mentioned spell save DCs. A handful could argue your spell slots would be better used for smites, whereas I prefer to use them for buffs and utility. But spells that rely on DC are both a gamble and a question in the efficacy of the spell slot. Perhaps better would be to ask about the context. Is the OP in a party with a rogue and a bard? Chances are they'd be the face, so the paladin's CHA for skills is less crucial. Otherwise, if his party comprised of mostly GWM-using martials, then maybe his CHA would be important as probably being the highest, so he's the face by default, and his damage isn't as needed. If he's with dedicated casters, chances are they'll be focused on their spellcasting ability more than anything else and able to control a larger segment of the combat better than the paladin can. But if he's the only dedicated martial, then he needs to be the big melee damage guy in a party that's already got a face and a controller.
It's all about context.
I find it quite interesting to see both poinds made, so thanks again. As a complete beginner party, we're still learning. I will be joined by a Hill Dwarf Light Cleric and a Halfling Rogue, so I have instinctively set myself up to be a close range damage dealer and (to some degree) the face of the party, too. Since we will be doing this with only 3 people in the party I figured I might aswell bring along some talking skills.
As for the progression further down, I still wasn't sure if I wanted to get Pole Arm Master too, and switch to an according weapon, but that heavily depends on how I feel about the Maul. Since our Cleric will probably be a bit more defensive to keep things like Bless running, I will probably be the only one that is constantly in the middle of a battle and I have no idea how my survivability will look like. We'll have to see. I will also be digging further into some guides as I go along to see where the build can go. So far I've got it planned out until level 3, when I get to choose my oath and pick some spells.
To be clear, you don't add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus action attack. Not the proficiency bonus (which is only applied during attacks). The fighting style lets you add your ability modifier to the bonus action attack's damage, and has nothing to do with proficiency bonuses