D&D 5E A simple houserule for martial/caster balance.

[DND_Reborn]

I think that shows why guidance would be necessary. If you want combats where people hit less often, then monsters take more hits to kill, so now you need to reduce hit points to compensate.

Fiddle with one lever, and there's a dial that needs to be adjusted elsewhere.

Actually, the two were already related due to how WotC worked bounded accuracy. Instead of escalating attack modifiers and AC, they went with escalating damage and hit points. They didn't solve the problem--they just shifted the focus.

We wanted it shifted back, in a fashion. So, it wasn't about any cascading effect like you might imagine, it was about addressing two issues that were already related.

And, FWIW, we started with reducing hp and quickly decided to raise AC afterward (like you suggest here):

ASIDE: I'm curious why you settled on disadvantage instead of just raising AC though.

The reason we rejected a flat +4 or 5 to AC was because it made some things unhittable, which was the point of bounded accuracy to correct. By choosing disadvantage, we didn't adjust the floor or ceiling levels at all, just the chances of rolling in between them.

If someone doesn't foresee the pitfalls of how systems are related, then yes guidance would be helpful.

And, actually, you don't need to reduce hp if you don't want to, but we found doing so keeps combats close to the same length. In all our playtesting and actual use, I would say our mod makes your typical battle 1-2 rounds longer.

That has since been addressed by using critical damage, instead of critical hits. Now, they are pretty much the same length in terms of number of rounds.

 

[James Gasik]

Actually, the two were already related due to how WotC worked bounded accuracy. Instead of escalating attack modifiers and AC, they went with escalating damage and hit points. They didn't solve the problem--they just shifted the focus.

We wanted it shifted back, in a fashion. So, it wasn't about any cascading effect like you might imagine, it was about addressing two issues that were already related.

And, FWIW, we started with reducing hp and quickly decided to raise AC afterward (like you suggest here):



The reason we rejected a flat +4 or 5 to AC was because it made some things unhittable, which was the point of bounded accuracy to correct. By choosing disadvantage, we didn't adjust the floor or ceiling levels at all, just the chances of rolling in between them.

If someone doesn't foresee the pitfalls of how systems are related, then yes guidance would be helpful.

And, actually, you don't need to reduce hp if you don't want to, but we found doing so keeps combats close to the same length. In all our playtesting and actual use, I would say our mod makes your typical battle 1-2 rounds longer.

That has since been addressed by using critical damage, instead of critical hits. Now, they are pretty much the same length in terms of number of rounds.

Thank you, it sounds like you knew exactly what you wanted to do, and which dials and switches to operate. Sadly, I have seen a ton of house rules (some of which were my own) made by people who don't foresee knock on effects, and that's why I think a book saying "if you do X, Y can happen" or "you can replace A, but then you need to worry about B possibly being an issue" is a good thing.

EDIT: for example, one might be tempted to do the opposite, make enemies easier to hit, because waiting for your turn when you have one attack and whiffing and then having no other action of consequence you can make is no fun for everyone. In that case, you run into other problems- everyone is taking more damage than expected for example.

Or you could decide fights are too short, and you want players to use more resources. By increasing hit points, enemies last longer, and have more opportunities to deal damage, thereby increasing their lethality unless you get the hit point increase to Goldilocks standards.

 

[ECMO3]

In a typical High Magic setting, cutting back on magic power is very difficult. But if you are creating a Low, or just lower, Magic setting, then there are all sorts of tricks to use and the players will be accepting of them because the expect it from a Low Magic setting. Capping the highest level of spells available, or increasing the level gap between gaining each level of spells, can work.

Ugh.

I understand the logic here, but how can you find people to play in such a game?

Every player I have ever DMed for wanted more magic in the game, not less. This is even true of the pure martials. I know personally I would gladly join a game as a "non-magic" Rogue but I don't know that I would ever join a game where they were curtailing magic.

I know that is just me and the people I have DMed for, but I think it is broadly representative of the D&D fanbase as a whole.

 

[James Gasik]

I'm surprised players don't balk at attunement limits, to be perfectly honest. I think they are a bit draconian, especially for non-casters, but I've rarely heard complaints about it.

 

[Undrave]

I'm surprised players don't balk at attunement limits, to be perfectly honest. I think they are a bit draconian, especially for non-casters, but I've rarely heard complaints about it.

They missed an opportunity with that rules by not calling back to the 'Fighters get magic swords' rules of 1e by giving martial types an additional atunement slot they could only use for weapons. It wouldn't fix much, but it would at least be flavorful.

 

[James Gasik]

I think it came down to their suggestion that magic items weren't core (despite making it important for weapon users to get magic weapons). Apparently there's a sidebar in, Xanathar's, I think it was, where they point this out by saying "hey, if you don't have magic weapons in your game, classes like monks or people who can cast magic weapon go up in value and may even be necessary".

 

[TheSword]

I think looking at magic items is the way to address the issue to be honest. A martial can do the things people seem to want martials to do (fly, command people, smash down walls etc) windows with magic items. It’s just at the DMs decision.

Just remove spells learned after 4th level. Wizards either find them as treasure in a scroll form or spellbook. Or research them themselves the same way a magic item is made. Problem solved, the dm doesn’t have to allow the problematic spells and can keep wizard power balanced with the fighter.

 

[James Gasik]

You know, TheSword, that sounds like a bada$$ campaign idea. The flipside to Dragonlance. The knowledge of Arcane magic has been lost for centuries, and only just now are Bards and Wizards re-learning the Art, having to secure sources of forgotten knowledge to advance beyond a certain point.

Then you could say this doesn't apply to Sorcerers or Warlocks, making those classes more attractive.

 

[clearstream]

Simply cap spells known to 4th level or less (maybe 5th level or less). Casters can keep the slots.

Thoughts?

Possibly create magical items that allow casters access to higher level spells for atunement and sufficient class level.

In that light, my rules for my e6 5e campaign, providing casters a small boost for using higher level slots.

Cantrip Damage and Extra Attacks
Cantrip damage and extra attacks do not scale past 6th level. Thus, you gain no more than one extra cantrip damage die or weapon attack.

Spell Slots and "Enhanced Spell Slots"
Classes and sub-classes with the spellcasting feature gain "enhanced spell slots" in place of the higher-spell-level slots they would ordinarily access beyond 6th level. For full-casters that applies to 4th-level-spell-slots and higher, for half-casters 3rd-level-spell-slots and higher, and for third-casters 2nd-level-spell-slots and higher. Casters can only prepare or know spells up to the level of their highest ordinary spell-slot.

To cast one of their spells, a character can expend an enhanced slot of twice the spell's level or higher. Enhanced spell slots count at their full level for counterspell , dispel magic and similar - both for countering and dispelling, and being countered or dispelled - otherwise counting as half their level. That is also true for non-casting purposes, such as Combat Wild Shape, Divine Smite, Font of Magic and Arcane Recovery: count enhanced spell slots as spell slots of half their level.

For example, a wizard can expend a 4th level enhanced slot to cast melf's acid arrow - a 2nd level spell - counting it cast at 4th level for counterspell , dispel magic and similar, and otherwise as 2nd level. Another wizard could expend a 6th level enhanced slot to cast counterspell , automatically countering the acid arrow .

Enhanced spell slots are regained at the same time as other spell slots.

Enhanced Spell Slots for Warlocks
Warlock spell slots are capped at 3rd level, and then become enhanced spell slots that count as 4th (and later 5th) level for counterspell , dispel magic and similar - otherwise counting as 3rd level.

 

[Asisreo]

I think looking at magic items is the way to address the issue to be honest. A martial can do the things people seem to want martials to do (fly, command people, smash down walls etc) windows with magic items. It’s just at the DMs decision.

Just remove spells learned after 4th level. Wizards either find them as treasure in a scroll form or spellbook. Or research them themselves the same way a magic item is made. Problem solved, the dm doesn’t have to allow the problematic spells and can keep wizard power balanced with the fighter.

This is by far the best solution, imo. People really don't like the feeling of DM fiat in theory, but when you're actually playing and you find that one spellbook with a spell you wanted to find, it's less "I should have had this already" and more "this is awesome."

Imagine how elated a player would be if they found a spellbook with Wish on it. Much more fun than having it decided for yourself since level 1 and merely waiting for level 17.