## Taking levels in monster types

Today I found this post on reddit and in one of the comments they mention taking levels in fey, outsider, and aberration (not all at the same time). Are there any alternate rules I’m not aware of or are they just referring to monsters as pcs rules from the srd.

Heres the OP

Over the past few days with some help from members of the /r/touhou Skype group, I have made a spreadsheet listing (almost) every Touhou character and have filled in some slots slots along their names accounting for their D&D Morality Alignment, Four Temperaments, MBTI, and other silly things that aren’t as relevant.

D&D Alignments explained: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alignment_(Dungeons_%26_Dragons)

Four Temperaments explained: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_temperaments

MBTI is harder to grasp, especially the cognitive functions but there are more than enough online resources detailing that.

Enneagram explained: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enneagram_of_Personality

If there is anything that should be put in or whatnot, please leave your thoughts on characters and also your alignment/MBTI/other if you like.

EDIT: If I like a suggestion and want to add it, I’ll do so in the name of the user who suggested it. You can also leave comments on the sheet as well.

Here’s an excerpt

Now, let’s see. You’ve given D&D (presumably 3.5e rather than 4e or 5e) classes and Pathfinder classes as a category. I can definitely help with that. Going down the line:

Rumia probably doesn’t have class levels, but she’d be a Commoner or just take levels of Outsider(Edit: Or Aberration, depending on how you see Youkai) if she did.

Letty Whiterock is probably just a Fey.

Kogasa Tatara is just an Aberration with Aberration levels.

## Is properly quantified 3SAT complete for PSPACE and all PH levels?

I know 3SAT is NP-complete and QSAT is PSPACE-complete. However, is it true that

$$\exists X_1 \forall X_2 \cdots Q_k X_k \colon \varphi(X_1, \ldots, X_k)$$

is complete for $$\Sigma_k$$, the existential side of level $$k$$ of the polynomial hierarchy if each clause in $$\varphi$$ has at most 3 literals (or some other constant size bound)? Similarly for

$$\forall X_1 \exists X_2 \cdots Q_k X_k \colon \varphi(X_1, \ldots, X_k)$$

in relation to $$\Pi_k$$, and the quantified version with unbounded alternation in relation to PSPACE, once again with each clause of $$\varphi$$ having at most 3 literals (or some other constant number)?

## How do you progress your familiar without taking more levels in that class?

I am playing a cleric/wizard/Mystic Theurge. I choose the familiar class feature for my wizard. MT only progresses a wizards spell casting and caster level. You do not learn new spells and the familiar does not gain increased abilities according to the familiar chart.

Is there a way to improve the familiar according to the chart without taking levels in a class that grant a familiar? I mostly want the ability to speak with it at level 5, and the all important spell resistant at 11th (which gets better the higher level I am).

The Iron Will/Familiar Bond/Improved Familiar Bond is not the route I wish to go because it requires way too many feats and Im already feat starved.

I know of Boon Companion, but that increases the total by 4, which helps (more so once I can get SR).

## Confidence intervals, Confidence levels and probability of simple tests

It seems to be a simple problem, but i cant figure it out

Lets say, I would like to know if there is some point to implement new feature. If we have to focus on the feature or not. Lets assume there is no possible some kind of test like questioning the users or whatever else. Its function will be easy, something like – for example “webcam for ecommerce for users that are paying premium account”.

To be specific, I have 1500 premium users. I can tell “Feature is used when atleast 75% of clients use it”. Great! We would like to run Fake Door test, where we implement just the button for webcam and when user click on it, we show him “we are implementing this feature right now, stay with us” or whatever else (i know, fake doors isnt the best method, but it is not the point of this). I will “test” it for 14 days. In 14 days, 350 clients will come on my site and they see this feature. 265 of clients clicks on the button.

What can I say about this feature? It seems like I can say “Yes, we have to implement it, because 75% of users will use this feature” (75% of 350 is 262.5 < 265) => H0 (Atleast 75% use this feature) seems to be ok. But it is not truth at all. Because there can be HUGE error (I tested ONLY around 23% of clients).

What I am trying to achieve is:
I would like to say – “With 95% confidence, 75% of clients will use this function, so we can implement it”.

I am lost of all confidence intervals, confidence levels and sample sizes, etc etc. Can someone help me how to get the confidence step-by-step and explain me, what can I count from those numbers (1500 premium users at all, 350 users saw the feature, 265 users used the feature).

## Can you take different archetype options at different levels?

Once you’ve picked a subclass option at level 3, could you later take a different subclass option, or do you lock into a specialty at level 3 and then run with it for the rest of that class’ progression?

For example, as a rogue, if you took the “Thief” archetype at level 3, giving you access to Fast Hands and Second Story Work, could you then take the “Assassin” archetype to give you the specific benefits that archetype gives instead of the “Thief” ones?

The PHB rogue description seems to imply that you couldn’t:

At 3rd level, you choose an archetype that you emulate in the exercise of your rogue abilities: Thief, detailed at the end of the class description, or one from another source. Your archetype choice grants you features at 3rd level and then again at 9th, 13th, and 17th level.

but I’d like a more certain answer, especially one that refers to archetypes in general. Also I’m not ashamed to admit I’d prefer a source with some authority that tells me you can mix and match, but I am looking for the truth of the rules when all is said and done…

• Different to Can you multiclass the same class twice for different class features because the no on that demonstrates that you can’t re-take a level of the same class. Taking different features for different levels is not the same thing, and would work differently.

• Similar to Can I mix monk traditions? but that one was specific to monks – which is why it didn’t show up on any searches I did, and why it wouldn’t on the searches of others. This question is specific enough to be clear and precise, but broad enough to be useful to others who aren’t in the exact same situation/using the same class.

## As a half-orc Barbarian, is it worth it to dip some levels into the Fighter class?

TL;DR: as a Great Weapon Master, half-orc Barbarian, is it worth it to take 3-4 (or more?) levels of Fighter, in order to deal more damage?

I’m going to play a half-orc Barbarian in a soon-to-begin D&D 5E pure PHB campaign, starting from level 1. I’ve decided I’m going to use the Great Weapon Master feat, weilding a greataxe (d12).

A half-orc Barbarian can be a critical hit powerhouse, thanks to Savage Attacks coupled with Brutal Critical. However, other than the advantage on attack rolls granted by Reckless Attack, there’s no way to raise the chance above ~10%. I find this a bit unsatisfying.

I’ve thought of picking up a few levels of the Fighter class, maybe after reaching level 5 with the Barbarian, in order to gain Extra Attack first. With three levels, by picking the Great Weapon Fighter fighting style and the Champion archetype, I can increase both the average damage output and the critical chance (the latter by around +5%, as far as I understand math), while also getting Action Surge.

This looks great but, of course, slows down the path towards more Brutal Critical dices and more rage uses and damage. Also, presuming I will reach level 20 (17 Barbarian/3 Fighter) in the campaign, I won’t get the last Barbarian ASI (at level 19) and Primal Champion, which means, at least, I won’t earn +2 to attack and damage rolls granted by reaching 24 Strength and +2 AC given by the raise in Constitution, thanks to Unarmored Defense. I might take another level of Fighter (16/4) to compensate for the ASI, but that would also mean one less Brutal Critical dice (since the Barbarian earns that last one at level 17), which is kind of against the purpose of such a critical hit-oriented build.

I can’t decide whether to follow this path or to only go for the Barbarian. Perhaps I didn’t even correctly estimate the increase in average damage output and critical chance, as I don’t really know the math.

Which multiclassing choice is more efficient for a greater damage output?

If you have a different combination of classes to achieve the best damage output, please point it out.

## “Banning” flying in the first few character levels

I’m sorry if this has been asked on here before but I don’t want my Aarakokra to be able to fly right from the start and I had come up with a way to have her wings be damaged in a way that it doesn’t seem like bs. Though I was wondering. I wanted to have something be pierced through one of her wings leaving her unable to fly but from what I’ve read anything can be healed with magic even if she’d loose the entire wing. What I had planned was that she would no longer be able to use one of her wings and later on in the story she would get a mechanical one to replace it.

Is there a way to do this withing the ruling of D&D?

## If I mandated that full casters take 1 non-spellcasting class level for every 2 spellcaster levels, would they be balanced with 2/3 casters?

I’ve been asking about how to balance player characters, and others have suggested using tier 3 classes only, or using only spellcasters who cast 6th-level spells.

This is not the place to contest those ideas, even if they happen to be the starting point for what happened next.

My players want to run a campaign where they all play dwarves, and dwarves have a malus to charisma. This arguably cuts out the bard, the skald, the bloodrager, the summoner and the paladin unless they take the Tortured Crusader archetype.

Along with the ban on wizards, sorcerers, druids, clerics, shamans, oracles, arcanists and witches, the playable classes are greatly reduced.

What would happen, balance-wise, if I were to introduce full casters again, mandating one level of a non-spellcasting class every 2 spellcaster levels?

Specifically, I have a player who would like to play a druid focused on earth magic, which I think is a great concept, but under the no-full-casters rule this is just not possible.

I expect the reduced caster level to harm those multiclassed characters more than the actual lack of favored class bonuses.

Examples:
Would a hunter 17 be better or worse than a druid 12 / ranger 5?
Would a warpriest 17 be better or worse than a cleric 11 / fighter 6?

Note: I will also be using martial initiators from Path of War, who work best when multiclassing due to their peculiar mechanics. I already expect the answer to be different for them (also because a fighter 6 / stalker 11 can reach level 7 maneuvers).

## Is there any way to detect how many levels of exhaustion a character has, per rules?

Imagine a villain has taken a character prisoner and is forcing them to stay awake several days (using the optional Xanathar’s Guide p78 rules about spending 24 hours without a long rest) in the hopes of getting them to level 3 exhaustion so he can force them to make a saving throw at disadvantage. (The specific situation that came up is a villain with a prison full of people affected by the feeblemind spell, who keeps meticulous records and tries to make sure they’re at level 3 exhaustion for the 30-day save to shake it off.) Is there a way for him to tell for sure whether or not they made their Con save to avoid exhaustion?

## Do I need to fill in all levels for a new focus?

When creating a new focus for The Strange, do I need to fill the 6 levels for it or could I leave some “blank” levels?