D&D (2024) Rules that annoy you

[James Gasik]

I'm also not keen on attunement slots and would rather do without them. I'm fine with needing to attune to powerful items to use them, but only allowing 3 I'm not so keen on.

What I'm currently doing in my game is setting attunements to 1+proficiency bonus. If items require attunement, it's only to unlock greater powers; they always do something without attunement. So for example, in the last session, they found a helmet that lets you use feather fall 1/short rest, but you can attune to to use levitate for 10 rounds/short rest (no concentration). In this way, it's less a restriction on the number of items you can have, but works a little more like Earthdawn magic items.

 

[pukunui]

Here's another thing that has annoyed me for multiple editions now: the fact that D&D's combat rules always make dealing damage the most optimal choice. Combat will continue to be a boring, repetitive slog as long as players continue to view doing something other than an attack as a waste of their turn. Some editions have tried harder than others to give players interesting options along with dealing damage, but that hasn't always been received well.

What I'm currently doing in my game is setting attunements to 1+proficiency bonus.

This sort of thing is fine if you're still using paper-and-pencil character sheets (or some other digital sheet), but those of us whose players rely on using D&D Beyond are fairly constrained in how we can house rule stuff like this. (In other words, while you can give PCs extra feats and proficiencies and the like in DDB, you can't give them extra attunement slots. The only work-around would be to recreate the magic item but remove the attunement requirement.)

 

[cbwjm]

Here's another thing that has annoyed me for multiple editions now: the fact that D&D's combat rules always make dealing damage the most optimal choice. Combat will continue to be a boring, repetitive slog as long as players continue to view doing something other than an attack as a waste of their turn. Some editions have tried harder than others to give players interesting options along with dealing damage, but that hasn't always been received well.


This sort of thing is fine if you're still using paper-and-pencil character sheets (or some other digital sheet), but those of us whose players rely on using D&D Beyond are fairly constrained in how we can house rule stuff like this. (In other words, while you can give PCs extra feats and proficiencies and the like in DDB, you can't give them extra attunement slots. The only work-around would be to recreate the magic item but remove the attunement requirement.)

I haven't tried, but it might be possible to create a feat that allows more atunement slots. If I'm remembering right, the artificer is allowed to attune to more items so the coding might be in there somewhere, it just depends on if they've granted access to it for homebrewers.

 

[Xeviat]

I hate the general "you can't use this ability again until you finish a long rest" wording. It's so much wordier than "1/day". Look:

You know the X cantrip. Starting at 3rd level, you can cast the Y spell with this trait, without requiring a material component. Starting 5th level, you can also cast the Z spell with this trait, without requiring a material component. Once you cast Y or Z with this trait, you can't cast that spell with it again until you finish a long rest. You can also cast either of those spells using any spell slots you have of the appropriate level.

Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma is your spellcasting ability for these spells when you cast them with this trait (choose when you select this species).

Now, what's it look like if we use "1/day" language.

You know the X cantrip. At 3rd level, you learn the Y spell. At 5th level, you learn the Z spell. You can cast Y or Z each 1/day without a spell slot or material component, or you can cast them normally with your spell slots. Choose Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma as your spellcasting ability for these spells.

They use 1/day in the Monster stat blocks. The designers say 1/day in interviews. You just have to define "day" as resetting after a long rest (wizards and clerics recover their spells after a long rest, it's not like they're different from each other anymore).

 

[Xeviat]

The Perception skill.

And now I am subject to cabbage and tomatoes thrown in my general direction. Woe and wailings!

You know, for an entire 2 year 5E campaign, I made the following rule changes:

• Everyone, including all npcs and monsters, got proficiency in all saves (so scaling remains smooth and someone's weak save doesn't become weaker and weaker).
• Passive Perception gets rolled into Wisdom saves/defenses.
• The Investigate skill takes Perception's active actions (like searching for someone or an active perception check).
• If an ability gives you Perception proficiency, it's Investigate proficiency instead.

Perception is just too much of a must have skill. It should be harder to sneak up on a high level person than a low level person, but plenty of classes don't get perception proficiency. I wanted all skills to be things you actively do, not passive things.

 

[pukunui]

I haven't tried, but it might be possible to create a feat that allows more atunement slots. If I'm remembering right, the artificer is allowed to attune to more items so the coding might be in there somewhere, it just depends on if they've granted access to it for homebrewers.

Hmm. I haven't tried either. I know that base artificers get extra attunement slots at the normal rate, but I'm not sure if armorer artificers have been implemented properly (because they get even more attunement slots that are limited to the pieces of their armor).

I hate the general "you can't use this ability again until you finish a long rest" wording. It's so much wordier than "1/day". Look:

This is an example of that "we must avoid having 5e resemble 4e in any way" linguistic gymnastics I was talking about upthread. I think the designers were so afraid of putting people off at the beginning of 5e that they went out of their way to avoid using any kind of shorthand/keywords in favor of this cumbersome "natural language".

The other one that annoys me is in monster statblocks when they write out "Recharges after a Short Rest or a Long Rest". Just write "1/Rest" and be done with it!

 

[Xeviat]

Hmm. I haven't tried either. I know that base artificers get extra attunement slots at the normal rate, but I'm not sure if armorer artificers have been implemented properly (because they get even more attunement slots that are limited to the pieces of their armor).


This is an example of that "we must avoid having 5e resemble 4e in any way" linguistic gymnastics I was talking about upthread. I think the designers were so afraid of putting people off at the beginning of 5e that they went out of their way to avoid using any kind of shorthand/keywords in favor of this cumbersome "natural language".

But D&D has used "1/day" for ever, that's not just 4E. Uuuuuuuugh!

 

[pukunui]

But D&D has used "1/day" for ever, that's not just 4E. Uuuuuuuugh!

I know, but the impression early 5e gave me was that the designers were metaphorically bending over backwards to avoid any association with 4e, which relied heavily on shorthand and keywords - even if those terms predated 4e.

 

[Xeviat]

I know, but the impression early 5e gave me was that the designers were metaphorically bending over backwards to avoid any association with 4e, which relied heavily on shorthand and keywords - even if those terms predated 4e.

And yet we're going back to some short hand (and capitalization of game terms!).

I miss 4E. Maybe I should revamp my 4.5?

 

[Quickleaf]

You know, for an entire 2 year 5E campaign, I made the following rule changes:

• Everyone, including all npcs and monsters, got proficiency in all saves (so scaling remains smooth and someone's weak save doesn't become weaker and weaker).
• Passive Perception gets rolled into Wisdom saves/defenses.
• The Investigate skill takes Perception's active actions (like searching for someone or an active perception check).
• If an ability gives you Perception proficiency, it's Investigate proficiency instead.

Perception is just too much of a must have skill. It should be harder to sneak up on a high level person than a low level person, but plenty of classes don't get perception proficiency. I wanted all skills to be things you actively do, not passive things.

Nice house rule!