We started using the DMG guidelines and suddenly the phenomenon we did not want was gone. What wasn't gone was going to 0 hp or PC death. So going to 0 hp went from normal and not much of a threat because whack-a-PC to more uncommon but scarier. So it did fix the issue with the tone of the game.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
House rule for Going below 0 hp and get up again with a good berry or a healing
- Thread starter TheDungeonTomb
- Start date
ad_hoc
(they/them)
Agreed.
When I first started with 5e I had the urge to create houserules for things. The more I play of it the fewer I use.
I've also noticed that 90+% of people's issues in forums are either from having 6+ PC parties or having very few encounters per long rest.
Yet house rules that seem to be aimed at increasing rests keep popping up.
Viking Bastard
Adventurer
I can confidently say that my house rules did not increase rests in our games. Or lessen them. Or impact them in any way.
YMMV, of course, if you find that to be a problem in your games. In general, I've never found short rests to be a problem at all, since they will only happen at natural break points anyway, and nobody in my party particularly likes breaking up the flow of things for a long rest.
I am certain your house rules are wonderful thing and my comment was not directed at those flawless beauties.
FrogReaver
As long as i get to be the frog
More uncommon I expected. What made it scarier?
I've long gone with the rule of gaining a level of exhaustion on reaching 0 HP. I think I only ever had one PC reach two levels of exhaustion. And this despite long rests being one week so it took seven days to eliminate one level of exhaustion.
A lot of PCs hit one level of exhaustion. Two PCs died in one encounter from very bad death saves, both getting reincarnated as gnomes.
I find the exhaustion rule led to more cautious play. Seven day long rests led to shower advancement and lower difficulty encounters being more problematic simply because there were more of them.
Also, the exhaustion rule was simple for the players as it uses a mechanic already in the game that's easy to find as it's at the back of the PHB.
A lot of PCs hit one level of exhaustion. Two PCs died in one encounter from very bad death saves, both getting reincarnated as gnomes.
I find the exhaustion rule led to more cautious play. Seven day long rests led to shower advancement and lower difficulty encounters being more problematic simply because there were more of them.
Also, the exhaustion rule was simple for the players as it uses a mechanic already in the game that's easy to find as it's at the back of the PHB.
Harzel
Adventurer
After we changed the type of encounter we ended up with characters going to 0 hp mostly when we had already used basically all our healing in previous encounters and when we were simply overmatched. The same encounter with all spell slots and the like available might not have been very hard. Maybe it wouldn't even result in a character going down. An ambush at the end of the day with no resources left would seem more like a risk of a TPK once one character goes down.
FrogReaver
As long as i get to be the frog
So going through 4 or 5 encounters with nearly no risk of PC death only to be extremely challenged with a possible TPK in the final encounter of the day (the challenge stemming from lack of resources) is scarier than risking that same possible TPK in most every fight you encounter (even with full resources)? Seems like an odd sentiment.
Similar Threads
