Search results

Well, yeah. That's what a long rest per 4 or 6 encounters is for. And there is still the first encounter of each set of two where they have to consider whether to use their short rest abilities. Not to mention the DM is theoretically supposed to be giving the players 2 short rests per long rest...

I don't know that I consider this a fault. It's good for players to feel free to use their cool abilities. It's why they made this character, it's what they're here in your game to DO. It's fine to encourage them to actually do it. Combats where everyone, even short rest characters, are holding...

I mean, they get this with archery, which does make them the best archers in the game. The problem is any class can take a negligible dip in fighter to get all the benefits of archery. So every effective ranger is a level 1 fighter as well. This is more a problem with 5e's multiclassing and...

Yeah, I think we've missed the boat on making those into fighter subclasses, even if I think UA scout is a fine addition to most campaigns. I think fighter's subclasses should instead provide additional options in combat that other classes can't easily replicate. Which is what feats and...

There is at least one limitation on player's abilities to take a long rest, and that's that you can only do it once a day. Whether that's actually a particularly useful limitation or if it leads to even worse gameplay than the alternative is up for debate. Honestly, if the GM is dead set on...

Always search wizards for their bat naughty word. Or there'll be a fireball in your future.

If I remember correctly, there's some stipulation that rests have to be "uninterrupted somewhere in the PHB. Ok nevermind I just looked it up again and it says the interruption has to be at least an hour long. Now if you'll excuse me, I have some previous DMs to fight.

I do think players should sleep, so I'm keen on keeping long rests at maybe slighly shorter than their current length for that purpose. But I do get annoyed when GMs use the fact that long rests are 8 hours to naughty word over players with an encounter 7 hours into a rest.

Outside of those special cases, are there any actual changes to combat between bright and dim light? Because like, I use terrain a bunch to make combat more interesting, but most of the time my party waits until after combat to deal with perception check stuff. So I don't end up seeing much...

I realized it wasn’t the best example I could’ve picked afterward. Oof. I meant more the “you steal things already using your disgusting human fingers, what if instead you stole things in a subclass appropriate way.”

Given how often rests are in conflict in 5e, I think we should move to either a 13th age style system, or instant short rests. The 13th age system applied to 5e would look like this. After every combat you get a short rest, after 4 (sometimes 3, if it fits the narrative / you beat your players...

I feel like this post does a good job explaining why I don't think we can safely push fighters into a place where they are much better than other classes at fighting. They should be good at fighting, but they can't be far ahead of everyone else, because combat is most of the game, and no one...

There are two things which change how good you are at the social pillar in 5e. Charisma score, and skills. So anyone who gets more of one of those is better at the social pillar than the average class. So, the Cha classes obviously qualify, but a rogue built a certain way will also qualify...

I recognize it would require some small rebalancing, but leaving combat or breaking initiative or however you want to describe it should be a short rest. Any amount of time out of combat is sufficient to let you catch your breath and regroup. This would require the game to be balanced around...

@dnd4vr had suggestions for rolling, fwiw

As Yeah, so long as the book actually includes the option to separate out ASIs, which base 5e doesn’t, I’ll be satisfied. Also I just want races to be more interesting and present in general. Once you get to combat 80% of races have nothing unique to offer.

Definitely, and I’ll keep my orc intellectual elite and meaty mini-luchadore halflings at my tables. Because that’s fun for me. It’s about having the option.

For reference, the thing I care about is always going to be player choice and the ability to tell a variety of stories in a compelling way. Something racial ASIs make more difficult because it means more half-orc barbarians show up to my table and I have yet to see a half-orc wizard at my table...

One 4 Strength god of whirling death coming up.

Sure, always. +2 to main score is always better than 2 in either int or strength. Likewise for +3 and +4. 5e just isn't build in a way that encourages ample use of all of your scores.