Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaculata" data-source="post: 8067349" data-attributes="member: 6801286">I think this is a good point. I think we should look for something that makes combat more risky, while also increasing the excitement and fun. So not a rule that leaves you unconscious on the ground for the rest of the fight, but rather something that allows you to take risks, with high reward.I'm not fond of adding new moves just to make combat more deadly. Its cool, but more of a new feature rather than a solution to make combat more deadly. Preferably, I want  a rule that makes as little changes to the existing rules as possible.I'm not exactly sure how this would work.This seems like an odd exception, when most spells are targeted.  It is also annoying, and more busy work for the DM. It can create a ping pong effect, where monster health is constantly bouncing up and down as they get caught in the healing-crossfire. It is also an amendment of existing spells, which means some spells will now have alternate rules. I am not fond of that.I think this idea would be better fitted in a topic for better 5E combat. They are good suggestions though, but don't directly address the issue of combat deadlyness.The turn order is part of the problem. But you could also just limit the number of death saves per combat.I think this is a good idea for deadlier monsters. A Demilich for example should simply force a death save. I think such additional rules could be added to existing monsters to make them more formidable. It wouldn't directly address the healing issue, but it does help on the whole in making some monsters scary again.I think making combat more varied, and making combat more deadly, are two separate issues. Both are worth looking at.</blockquote>

Verification