Search results

These are all good changes imo, we use something similar. In particular, I really like the idea of an escalating chance of a lingering injury for each crit suffered, or each time reduced to zero hp (and/or each failed death save). I imagine starting at 1 in 20, then adding 1 for each adverse...

Sure, it is intended to be fairly brutal and uncompromising.

You might find this of interest, some other options to make 5e more challenging: http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/241570/5e-Hardmode

Yes, such is the Problem with Story, as I like to call it (more specifically, the problem with pre-plotted story arcs, most prominent in 1-20 level adventure paths).

Fair call 5e is faster than 4e and probably 3e (it's been so long, I cant rem now how long 3e combat took)

100% agree with Zardnaar. 5e is far too easy and survivable. Partly because of the broken feats nominated, but also because of the 3 death saves regime, combo'd with hilariously convenient ranged, bonus action healing word for the whack-a-mole effect. Significant houseruling is required to make...

I think it is best to treat adv/disad as rare, and still use mods like 1-3. The rest of game uses such modifiers after all (eg sliding DCs, cover, Stat bonuses/prof bonuses) - it doesnt take much to also offer such granularity in combat. Only adv/disad is too blunt a tool, imo, it goes too far...

The best fix for darkvision, by far imo, is to turn it into low light vision instead. When only monsters see naturally in the dark, the game is better for it.

yeah I prefer all PC races lowlight at best. Only monsters see in the dark.

Is your 5e game too safe and survivable? Too whack-a-mole? Too cakewalk? Might be time to try Hardmode. http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/241570/5e-Hardmode

My general rule for hiding in combat - I dont allow it. Hide before, sure, get your ambush round. But after that, generally cant hide anymore.

Yeah I am a big fan of deck init - including it's simplicity and reducing the impact of Dex

(1) Card deck initiative as has already been suggested. (2) Players only roll (vs their Dex, roll equal or under). If they succeed, they go before the monsters. If they fail, they go after the monsters. If you want to differentiate bosses, they need to roll under half their Dex. Speeds things...

The single most important rule 5e needs is a formal Party Retreat rule, to free GMs (and players) from the tyranny of "balanced encounters" http://dndhackersguild.weebly.com/blog/party-retreat-rule

yes indeed fair enough - and actually I played 4e for 3 years, I like such an approach too. It's just a different kind of fun, and lately I have been leaning towards a looser approach

I just find when you lay out a grid map the game gets more boardgamey all of a sudden. I prefer no map or a rough sketch if required, and keep distances loose.

I am disappointed, but not surprised, to see grid maps in the lead.

Yep, fair call, it's not at all clear. GM's judgment applies. But then, I wouldnt recommend using the double dice rule at all. It just makes smite and SA stupid good. Instead, I would recommend a houesrule along the following lines: max weapon damage dice only, plus half level. SA, smite...

No grid for me, just a scale, and half the time I will guesstimate it anyway - "it's about 6 days march if you go the long way round by road, or more directly through the dark forest it's 4 days. Which way do you want to go?"

I think it would be completely fine. Obviously he would use his "heightened" hearing to discern friend from foe, and reckless attack cancels being blind. You'll hit slightly less often, but AC is so low in 5e it's not going to be much of a problem - esp if you have a cleric with bless or pick up...