D&D 5E Homebrew: Fighter hacking notes

[Quickleaf]

weapon masteries that have a save can be simplified with +/- 5 mechanics.
Instead of save vs. prone, if you beat AC by 5 or more, your target is prone.

I really love the elegance of the +/-5, at least in concept, and even have my own fantasy heartbreaker built around it.

But I've really struggled getting it to work in my D&D games.

My players usually don't keep track of monster AC, even when I try different tricks to display it, it just slips through the cracks. So getting them to the next step of "did I hit by 5 above its AC" was next to impossible and involved several exchanges between GM and player each round.

Then when I would try to track "did they hit by +/-5" across multiple PCs with multiple attacks against enemies with varying AC... and in 5e at least it became a mentally exhausting for me as GM to handle smoothly & efficiently. I feel like with 5e there's enough mental burden, this added burden doesn't work for me personally.

But in a lighter / OSR system? I think it could awesome.

 

[dave2008]

I really love the elegance of the +/-5, at least in concept, and even have my own fantasy heartbreaker built around it.

But I've really struggled getting it to work in my D&D games.

My players usually don't keep track of monster AC, even when I try different tricks to display it, it just slips through the cracks. So getting them to the next step of "did I hit by 5 above its AC" was next to impossible and involved several exchanges between GM and player each round.

Then when I would try to track "did they hit by +/-5" across multiple PCs with multiple attacks against enemies with varying AC... and in 5e at least it became a mentally exhausting for me as GM to handle smoothly & efficiently. I feel like with 5e there's enough mental burden, this added burden doesn't work for me personally.

But in a lighter / OSR system? I think it could awesome.

I have had the same desire to use that mechanic and similar worries. I know PF2 uses the +10 / -10 mechanic and I don't hear a lot of complaints. Is 10 just easier math so it is easier to remember?

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

This is very, very good.
I have a few quibbles with specific stuff (Versatile fighting style, Bulwark Iron Guard), but a log of these changes address the major issues that many people have with the Fighter.

 

[Quickleaf]

I have had the same desire to use that mechanic and similar worries. I know PF2 uses the +10 / -10 mechanic and I don't hear a lot of complaints. Is 10 just easier math so it is easier to remember?

Could be that it's just easier. Or could be PF2 players (if that's a distinct subset from D&D players) have a higher appetite for mechanical complexity?

This is very, very good.
I have a few quibbles with specific stuff (Versatile fighting style, Bulwark Iron Guard), but a log of these changes address the major issues that many people have with the Fighter.

Thanks Cap'n!

Yeah, there's a couple new fighting styles – Versatile, First Blood, Quickdraw – that need improvement.

Bulwark has been a thorn in my side for a year. I know it's competing with Heavy Armory Mastery somewhat. And it needs clarification which types of damage it works against (e.g. probably not psychic). And lastly I need to get the numbers right. For a while I thought about using resistance – but (a) didn't want to steal barbarian's thunder, and (b) the feel I'm going for is shaking off little "plinky" ongoing damage not shaking off a dragon's breath through grit teeth. So things like magic missiles, crossbow bolts, ongoing environmental damage (but that gets back to which types, cause not getting hurt by walking through razorvine while armored is different than not getting hurt by ongoing poison gas...because of armor...which obv makes no sense).