D&D 5E Crazy dice ideas

[Kobold Stew]

If you do that, expect everyone to start wielding daggers, or possibly dinner forks.

I mean, why burden yourself with a heavy object like a sword when any sharp stick you find on the ground works just as well?

Sorry, just thinking like a gamer...

Not the gamers I would play with. This sort of reductio just ignores the basic soundness of the OP's idea.

Would some people choose your popsicle stick idea? They might. Who cares? If they find that fun, fine. At my table, they'd be laughed away in a second.

But if one player wants to be a twink, either the DM will say yes or no. In either case, that helps sets the tone of the game.

There are of course many possible ways to avoid this, even if one player did want to go this way:
* not give out magic popsicle sticks. The magic weapons made available to the players by the DM will be the weapons they use for most of their careers.
* distinguish weapons from found objects, which do 1d4 for anyone.

Honestly, I'd be fine with a dagger doing full damage in the hand of a professional: against unarmoured opponents they have a comparable stopping power to any other hand weapon.

The OP's suggestion is reasonable and balanced, and would be comfortable as D&D at my table. Sure it's in other games as well, but that's not a liability -- it may even be a strength.

 

[Gorgoroth]

...

uhhh, no. People have been known, quite often, to survive dozens of stab wounds. Try that with an Axe. Didn't think so.

Reductio ad absurdam indeed. An axe or a sword does more damage than a dagger. Is there even any point discussing that? It's a non-starter in D&D anyway, never gonna happen.

I'd even go the other way. To take advantage of all your strength you NEED to use that big axe. The lumberjack's prowess would be wasted on a handaxe or a knife. It's like riding your bike down a hill in 1st gear, quite inefficient. Give the big brute a two handed axe and he'll chop wood...or your body--in twain with it. As it should be. Use a weapon proportionate to your strength. And yes, that means double dipping. Big, huge guys have all sorts of advantages in combat. Not to say skill doesn't matter, but that's not even the argument. If you take take the skill of a Bruce Lee and put it in the body of a modern fighter, he will be superior. (IMO). All other things being equal, the stronger man can swing harder and more often and more true without getting fatigued.

chopppy choppy

 

[Sunseeker]

If you do that, expect everyone to start wielding daggers, or possibly dinner forks.

I mean, why burden yourself with a heavy object like a sword when any sharp stick you find on the ground works just as well?

Sorry, just thinking like a gamer...

Because your dinner fork would do 1d4-3 and your greatsword would do 1d10+4

Come to think of it, I'm not all entirely sure that damage should always be randomized. Why can't we say a dinner fork causes 1 damage +str or something.

You could have knock-down, drag-out brawls by nobles without ever having to worry about any of them having more than 10 HP.

 

[CroBob]

Some clever ideas have been thrown around in other threads, which made me wonder about some possible design decisions regarding dice use in combat :
damage as a function of the wielder, not the weapon :
when assigning a damage potential to each character/monster, what about assigning it to its build (class/level/theme/feats/whatever) rather than to a weapon. For instance, Fighters could be d10, rogues d6 melee damage, regardless of their weapon. This die value could be combined with expertise (for example, a lvl 5 fighter could have 3 maneuvers dice available, at d10 value when used for dealing melee damage). Feats / weapons would open maneuvers (such as 2-Handed : apply your str mod to damage, or Blade Defence : you have advantage on one die when you parry). It opens a huge design space while staying true to DnD, I think.

I'm actuall a big fan of this idea. However, I wouldn't base damage on class, but on general combatiness of the character type (like base attack bonus), modified by feats, relevant stats, etc.

Incidentally, I'm working on a game right now where the kind of weapon doesn't matter, but, rather how skilled the character is with it. So, yeah, I liked your idea before you even shared it!

 

[technoextreme]

Well, why spend the money on a long sword when a short sword, rapier, dagger, butter knife or popsicle stick all do the same damage?

If you're playing a game where encumbrance counts, or where starting money is tight, expect player characters to save where they can.

(By the way, calling my argument dumb based on your dislike of D&D weapons is not only misdirected, it's rude. If you don't like the game, what are you doing in this forum?)

Its dumb because its actually fairly realistic. Most if not all of the D&D weapons were kitbashed implements you'd find in a shed.

uhhh, no. People have been known, quite often, to survive dozens of stab wounds. Try that with an Axe. Didn't think so.

Reductio ad absurdam indeed. An axe or a sword does more damage than a dagger. Is there even any point discussing that? It's a non-starter in D&D anyway, never gonna happen.

No. A dagger or even a fork is no less fatal than an ax namely because you are ignoring modern medicine which honestly reduces even the most gruesome of injuries to livable. A simple stab wound in the right area and you are going to die rather quickly.

I'd even go the other way. To take advantage of all your strength you NEED to use that big axe. The lumberjack's prowess would be wasted on a handaxe or a knife. It's like riding your bike down a hill in 1st gear, quite inefficient. Give the big brute a two handed axe and he'll chop wood...or your body--in twain with it.

I could probably stab the guy fifteen times in the process while he just winds up with the ax.

 

[LostSoul]

Why not assign dice based on the attack itself?

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

Schroedinger HP

What about characters not having HP on their sheet, but only Hit Dice. These dice would get rolled only to counter some "hit".

This is a very intriguing idea, and I think could be done as a variant/module that could be very fun to play with.

To brainstorm on this, expand with:

Characters get one HD per level, size based on their class, and a D6 HD for each + of AC bonus attained {armor, mages armor daily spell, dodge feat bonus, etc..}

When the character takes damage, the player can roll any number of remaining HD to ablate the damage and add their chosen stat modifier {or required modifier for things like falling that targets CON or DEX, no using WIS to avoid the falling damage unless you are a monk}

If the amount ablated is more that double the damage you don't lose one of the dice rolled.
If the amount ablated is less than the damage rolled, you suffer a wound.
If the amount ablated is less than half the damage rolled, you suffer two wounds.

If you have more wounds than your current level, you are disabled.
If you suffer a wound while disabled, you fall unconscious.
If you suffer a wound while unconscious, you die.

In combat healing can restore HD or grant temp HD, wounds can only be healed out of combat.

Special attacks may inflict two wounds if not ablated, and three if the damage is double the HD roll

The disadvantage and advantage mechanic could be tweaked to apply to damage/ablation instead of things like the 4e 'Weakened' condition or wraith form.

Monsters play by the same rule but generally only have 3 to 6 wound points remaining. This allows you to encounter previously wounded creatures without making them complete class cannons. Minions would only be able to handle 1 wound before being disabled, but could still have tons of HD.
'Stock' monsters could deal static damage in order to let DM's run things smoother.


This gives you another lever to play with regards to the deadliness of combat and another widget to hang special effects off of.

Definitely ramps up the unpredictability of combat while keeping the core of the DnD mechanics in play.

 

[ren1999]

Cyberen,
I'm also partial to your idea.
It doesn't matter what the weapon is, the weapon does damage according to the class and add some ability mod damage as well as damage from level/feats/magic.

Dedicated fighting classes do the highest weapon damage.
Mixed fighting and casting classes do moderate damage.
Casters do the least damage with weapons but get area spells.

 

[ren1999]

Because your dinner fork would do 1d4-3 and your greatsword would do 1d10+4

Ah, but a dinner fork wielded by a dedicated fighting class would be more lethal than a large sword wielded by a magic learning geek.

And yes, I think weapons should have strength limitations.

 

[Sunseeker]

Ah, but a dinner fork wielded by a dedicated fighting class would be more lethal than a large sword wielded by a magic learning geek.

And yes, I think weapons should have strength limitations.

Sure, but that would be modified by some element of your class, or some RAW ability. If I shove a fork into you with my 20 str it should logically do more damage than if I use 20 str. Or if I have a high BAB, I should be able to hit you better with anything.

But the weapon itself should do very minimal damage.