Search results

I am currently working on a reputation system for 5e. Here is the idea: A 7 tiered system that is coupled to numerical modifiers as following: -9 to -7 Hostile -6 to -4 Hated -3 to -1 Disliked 0 Neutral 1 to 3 Liked 4 to 6 Loved 7 to 9 Exalted EDIT, after gathering feedback from you guys...

I would never even consider to run a game differently. Not doing the things you described will create a very boring game, since there will be no dynamic elements at all. The whole reason for D&Ds existence is to allow a more dynamic approach than say a computer game. It's based on the dynamics...

You guys might be interested in this Explanation is found here: How to F$%& CR: A Practical Example of Monster Building the Angry Way (c) by AngryGM

Untrained is the baseline. Novice is gained through downtime training, usage of the skill. Proficiency is gained like RAW. Expert is gained by putting an extra proficiency point into a proficient skill.

What do you think about my approach to make skills and training more granular? It's a few posts further back.

Interesting, it adds a little more complexity though with the extra dice. I am always thinking about whether the trade-off would be worth it.

Why not just roll a d20 with advantage?

Yep, have thought about that as well. It adds a bit of complexity but in the case of skill checks I could see that allowing to stack this special "unskilled or expert" disadvantage / advantage with a common RAW advantage / disadvantage. Perhaps one would just have to name it differently. I...

How about this system Unskilled: disadvantage ( d20 + Ability Mod ) Novice: d20 + Ability Mod Proficient: d20 + Ability Mod + Proficiency Mod Expert: advantage ( d20 + Ability Mod + Proficiency Mod) Emphasizes the difference between no training and some training. Proficiency means that someone...

Very interesting approach thank you for sharing!

I am a fairly new DM. I have heard a couple of people argue, that rogue and bard expertise is a bad design choice due to its impact on the modifiers in the bounded accuracy system. Is it too strong or just right? I would be interested in hearing your opinions.

I thought about combining Ilbranteloths approach with the granularity of Charlaquins idea and the implementation based on your ideas, Maxperson. Untrained: Disadvantage (Ability mod) Novice: Ability mod Proficient: Ability mod + proficiency bonus Expert: Advantage (Ability mod + proficiency...

Thanks Maxperson, that actually sounds like a nice way to implement it. I might try that. I also found this approach by Ilbranteloth: What do you guys think about this? It nerfs players with non-proficiency in skills a bit more than the RAW do and therefore make the system a bit more dynamic...

I meant, how do you implement it with the current rules? If I can select 2 skills to be proficient, can I instead choose one to be expert in? How do I become a novice in a skill? And also how would that affect the Bard / Rogue abilities to get expertise.

If you let everyone get expertise wouldn't that devalue rogues and bards? Also how would training a skill work?

One of my favorite things to do as a DM is to fiddle with the RAW to adjust them to my liking. And I am sure that most of you do too. I always like to hear what other people come up with in that regard. It is great inspiration and sometimes you find a well thought out houserule that you ask...

Does that mean you roll with disadvantage if you are not proficient in a saving throw? That seems like a pretty big impact on balance when non proficient characters try to dodge AoE damage for example. Also, why did you up the DCs by 5 points? Say some character is not proficient in persuasion...

These points are quite simple to solve, without screwing with the balance of the game too much. Bonus actions (unless solely used) and multiple attacks do not alter the initiative, thus preserving the original intended balance by not creating a disatvantage to use them. Spells that last "one...

Here are two alternative ways of handling initiative. In both variants actions get declared before we enter combat, thus simulating the battlefield differently (and imo more "realistic" and fun) than the standard initiative: 1. Is based on Mike Mearls Greyhawk Initiative (see attachment)...