D&D 5E 5e - Just Missing the Mark

[Mistwell]

Since many of you are recommending I look into DM's Guild content, are you aware of anything that would serve as a tactical add-on to 5e? Something that would grant battlefield maneuvers to characters, revise monsters to give flavorful abilities in combat (as well as raising the effectiveness of solo creatures), and maybe provide guidelines to using terrain (this is what happens when you drop a chandelier, crack the ice on a frozen lake, etc)?
If not, is it "legal" for me to create something that can be used by the community?

Try 4e D&D instead?

I mean it's not impossible to do what you're asking as there are more 4e-ish 3rd party monster books out there, for example. And there are optional DMG rules for facing and flanking and some other things. There are 3rd party products to add classes like Warlord to 5e as well. But I am not sure patching the game to simulate those things better is actually a more enjoyable experience than just playing 4e which already does those things. 5e is fundamentally a change in direction and tone from 4e, and it's intentionally not many of the things you seem to want from it.

For you, that misses the mark, which is too bad. For the larger pool of players and DMs and fans out there, it's literally the best selling RPG ever, going back to the beginning of the inventions of RPGs. It seems to be a "hit" with an overwhelming majority out there. Which doesn't mean it should be a "hit" with you of course.

As for "guidelines to using terrain (this is what happens when you drop a chandelier, crack the ice on a frozen lake, etc)?" while you may find a 3rd party supplement for a series of such challenges, it will never be THAT complete. No game, anywhere, ever, is going to list that many details for rules. Even the crunchiest most hand-holding game is not going to go to that level of specifics. You will, on some level, need to be a DM/GM to play a role playing game. You're going to need to use some amount of general tools (DCs for difficulties of situations, comparable challenges, etc.) to adjudicate those things.

 

[Satyrn]

Try 4e D&D instead?

Bonus: Warlord included!

 

[Mistwell]

Bonus: Warlord included!

Yes, and he can even shout your severed hand to grow back!

I think I shall run away now before I am pelted with tomatoes.

 

[Retreater]

Try 4e D&D instead?

I mean it's not impossible to do what you're asking as there are more 4e-ish 3rd party monster books out there, for example. And there are optional DMG rules for facing and flanking and some other things. There are 3rd party products to add classes like Warlord to 5e as well. But I am not sure patching the game to simulate those things better is actually a more enjoyable experience than just playing 4e which already does those things. 5e is fundamentally a change in direction and tone from 4e, and it's intentionally not many of the things you seem to want from it.

For you, that misses the mark, which is too bad. For the larger pool of players and DMs and fans out there, it's literally the best selling RPG ever, going back to the beginning of the inventions of RPGs. It seems to be a "hit" with an overwhelming majority out there. Which doesn't mean it should be a "hit" with you of course.

As for "guidelines to using terrain (this is what happens when you drop a chandelier, crack the ice on a frozen lake, etc)?" while you may find a 3rd party supplement for a series of such challenges, it will never be THAT complete. No game, anywhere, ever, is going to list that many details for rules. Even the crunchiest most hand-holding game is not going to go to that level of specifics. You will, on some level, need to be a DM/GM to play a role playing game. You're going to need to use some amount of general tools (DCs for difficulties of situations, comparable challenges, etc.) to adjudicate those things.

I am now running two 4E games - so half of my gaming is in 4E and half in 5E. After an exhausting 2 hour combat on Sunday - that wasn't even that important of a fight - I'm left wondering: what is the happy middle ground between the two systems? I've run 13th Age, and while I was okay with it, my group overall despised it. (I think it was the damage inflation of 1D per character level).

So I'm curious if it's easier to mod 4E to be faster paced or to mod 5E to be more tactically interesting?

 

[77IM]

If not, is it "legal" for me to create something that can be used by the community?

Yes, it definitely can be. IANAL but there are 3 ways:

1. If you put it up on DMsGuild.com, you can use any 5E rules you want, plus certain settings.
2. If you conform to the licensing terms of the OGL, you can use any 5E rules in the SRD.
3. If it's just a fan-made work that you're putting up for free, it's not really clear just how much you can reference 5E before it becomes copyright (or possibly trademark) infringing. But, in practice, as long as it's a free fan-made thing that is respectful of the IP and doesn't pretend to be WotC-produced, you should be fine. I post such things here on ENWorld all the time, and I've never gotten sued over it. (Maybe Morrus is getting regularly sued on my behalf...?)

As far as making something that is "rules legal," the DM has a ton of latitude in interpreting improvised actions; see the box on PHB page... 193! Holy crap, [MENTION=6984687]200orcs[/MENTION] was right! Anyway, as long as your new tactical options don't actively contradict anything in the RAW, they could be considered "rules legal" in the sense that they are valid DM rulings within the framework of the rules. They'd still be house rules (of your house) but not variant rules.

 

[Satyrn]

Page 193. I really must remember that.

 

[Haffrung]

I am now running two 4E games - so half of my gaming is in 4E and half in 5E. After an exhausting 2 hour combat on Sunday - that wasn't even that important of a fight - I'm left wondering: what is the happy middle ground between the two systems? I've run 13th Age, and while I was okay with it, my group overall despised it. (I think it was the damage inflation of 1D per character level).

So I'm curious if it's easier to mod 4E to be faster paced or to mod 5E to be more tactically interesting?

Your best bet might be running 4E but only having one or two combats per session. I started enjoying 4E when I realized that it's a terrible system for fight after fight. IMHO, 4E works best when you run it like a standard roleplaying game with lots of talking, investigation, etc. and combat is only for important, climactic scenes.

 

[Retreater]

Your best bet might be running 4E but only having one or two combats per session. I started enjoying 4E when I realized that it's a terrible system for fight after fight. IMHO, 4E works best when you run it like a standard roleplaying game with lots of talking, investigation, etc. and combat is only for important, climactic scenes.

With 4E, I don't think there is an option other than having one or two combats per session. Haha.

I'm running the H1-E3 series, and we're finding a lot of the combats are slogs. I'm also creating a campaign that is built to be like you describe - and it's so far going much better.

 

[Satyrn]

So I'm curious if it's easier to mod 4E to be faster paced or to mod 5E to be more tactically interesting?

4E killed my desire to homebrew, so I have to say I'm sure 5e would be easier to mod.

 

[Satyrn]

And it probably makes more sense to start with the system that you aren't describing as a slog.