D&D 5E Advanced D&D or "what to minimally fix in 5E?"

[W'rkncacnter]

the subclass/prestige class change alone would require rewriting all the subclasses at minimum, and most likely the base classes as well. removing absolute abilities would require a similar overhaul.

 

[Blue]

There was a "what do you wish 2024 D&D was like", and it had a bunch of things I'd like that wouldn't fit this because they would be reworking classes and such.

But I'm pretty close to being done with 5e completely due to it's encounters per day calibration. The balance between classes is all flummoxed based that where the designers calibrated for balance and where most DM run are not close at all.

So I'd be fine replacing "long rest" with "per adventure" and short rest with something that happens more frequently than that still only 2-3 times per adventure, and introduce a new quick rest that only allows spending of HD and doesn't recover any attrition. That can leave the classes intact (instead of a more elegant fix that would need to rework them) so it's a supplement instead of a redo.

 

[GuardianLurker]

I'd rework how the Concentration subsystem is applied. It cut out too many buffs, when a short duration would probably be all that they need. Then how it was applied to the spells was another issue - in practice, it often end-up being an "This is an out-of-combat spell" indicator. Moreover, because of it's often short-term expectations, if you could work a duration longer than a round or two out of a concentration spell that was intended for in-combat, that spell often went from "worth-it" to pretty near "absolute best in slot". Often to the point that there was no reason to have more than one combat concentration spell in a spell level, as only the one would ever get chosen.

 

[Shardstone]

New classes too. You can work in a class with a new subsystem, and then let a few other classes get subclasses using that, and boom you've expanded the game without modifying the core.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Kind of odd to bother with an 'Advanced D&D 5E' a full decade after the game's release. Wouldn't it have made sense to make all these changes to (general) your game 10 years ago when you hadn't played the heck out of the version you didn't like?

I'm pretty sure probably every single potential rule adjustment listed has been made by someone for their own game and has probably posted rules for it here or on Reddit or on DMs Guild or RPG.net or any other of the dozens of sites full of D&D material. There's no reason why any person should have been playing a version of 5E they had an issue with-- there were fixes to be had across the entire spectrum of gamers on the internet.

 

[Minigiant]

I'd rework how the Concentration subsystem is applied. It cut out too many buffs, when a short duration would probably be all that they need. Then how it was applied to the spells was another issue - in practice, it often end-up being an "This is an out-of-combat spell" indicator. Moreover, because of it's often short-term expectations, if you could work a duration longer than a round or two out of a concentration spell that was intended for in-combat, that spell often went from "worth-it" to pretty near "absolute best in slot". Often to the point that there was no reason to have more than one combat concentration spell in a spell level, as only the one would ever get chosen.

One thing I would have done is somehow combined Concentration and Attunement.

Basically allowing characters to attune to magic items, concentrate on magic spells, and manifest magic boons up to a number.

This would let your casters still have the option of casting a bunch of nasty spells at once at the cost of having fewer magic items attuned.
Whereas your noncasters can go full Christmas tree.
And your half casters can go half way, wearing some magic gear while leaving 1-3 slots open for persistent magic buffs and active spell attacks.

This could also fix some overused spells by giving them concentration. Suddenly locking 1 attunement into mage armor everyday becomes a real decision when you lose a sweet wand.

 

[Krachek]

I would like simplier character creation.

In ten years we make no use of magic item Gp value.

We already ban darkvison for all PCs.

Absolute abilty should be reserved for class, like immune to fear for Paladin. But I dont see those as a failure in the system.

 

[Composer99]

If you want a genuinely minimal fix, then I think all you really need to do is retrofit sorcerer so that all sorcerous origins have origin spells à la Tasha's, give the ranger a bit of love (which I daresay the gloomstalker and Tasha's changes manage), clean up a few spells, and give the champion fighter a bit more polish.

Would those changes fix some of the deeper structural issues with the game, such as how using the adventuring day as the basic gameplay time unit (as it were) for class and encounter/adventure design/balance has, when run up against a player base that isn't that interested in that kind of adventuring (and published adventures that rarely enforce it!)? No, but I don't think you can try to fix those things and still recognisably be D&D 5e. At that point you're getting into heartbreaker territory.

A lot of the changes suggested in the OP go too far, to my mind, to really qualify as minimal. They certainly seem to be straying towards heartbreaker territory.

 

[Minigiant]

The other minimum thing that would fix 5e, beyond what is done in the 2024 version is

Give a Sample DC 15 or DC 20 check for each skill.

Not do like 3e and have a large list for every skill.
But give a moderately hard check that all DMs and players can see and agree on what the investment of a skill entails.

 

[Corinnguard]

Not that familiar with level up advanced 5E, does it do the things you are looking for OP?

None of the stuff the OP mentioned is in Level Up. It does, however, fix a few of the problems found in 5e.

Home | Level Up A must read for anyone wanting to level up.