D&D 5E Deal Breakers - Or woah, that is just too much

[Transformer]

I think my only rules-based deal-breaker is if the DM insists on rolled hit points. I had a very long spell where I never rolled anything above a '1', and while playing a character with a weakness can be fun once, it very quickly ceases to be.

There's a rule, I believe in one of Kevin Crawford's games, that has you roll for hit points, but you re-roll your entire hit point pool at every level, and take the new result only if it's higher than the old one. I always thought that sounded like a good system. You get the randomness of rolling, but while you could get screwed for a level or even two, you're never permanently screwed. Eventually you will roll better, and your crappy rolls will be wiped from the record.

 

[CapnZapp]

Yeah, no - that rule just ups the average by significant amounts.

Instead I suggest you change the rule to let you either roll or take the average *rounded down*.

This way rolling comes with a proper risk-reward system, AND you can avoid rolling low by accepting a safe but slightly lower total.

It's important that reward and risk is bundled together. The PHB system only means gamblers are hosed. The Crawford rule only means the element of choice is removed; of course I'm gonna roll if I eventually get a total higher than average.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

This way rolling comes with a proper risk-reward system, AND you can avoid rolling low by accepting a safe but slightly lower total.

This rather presupposes you want a risk/reward system with HP rolling, which I suspect most people strongly do not.

If you do want one, though, for whatever reason, that works. Personally I think rolling for HP can DIAF because it's just too much RNG. Roll a few 1s and 2s a character can be permanently and unfixably crippled (save by the mercy of death). I've seen it happen, too (hell, the odds aren't even that low) - it was one of the first things we house-ruled back in the day.

 

[Iry]

It's not that easy for a DM, because the way you adjudicate as DM directly influences the way all your players are playing. You are kind of like a teacher in that regard. If you laugh it off once, your players will not pay attention the next time either. If you want them to take care you have to make them learn it the hard way. If they almost died because they didn't take care of it, you can bet they'll be sure to strategically think about who holds the torch the next time.

No. You should almost never use negative reinforcement on your friends. If you laugh it off and your players continue the behavior despite warning them once or twice then you should have a conversation after the game about your expectations as a DM. Good communication is the key, not making your players feel like crap.

Case in point -- the scenario was based on a true story. After the game, three of the players got together to discuss leaving the DM's table. It is true that the players are now much more careful about who is using the torch, but they are also much more pissed about having to play under such paranoid conditions.

 

[Azurewraith]

I find it best to give players leeway with things like holding items i assume when combat starts unless they say otherwise they drop whats in there mits and go for there default equipment, same with back packs i assume that as combat starts they drop them and then pick them up after etc.

 

[delericho]

We play with rolled HP but we use 2 dice instead of 1 to create a bell curve and to up the average to the amount you can pick in the book.

There's a rule, I believe in one of Kevin Crawford's games, that has you roll for hit points, but you re-roll your entire hit point pool at every level, and take the new result only if it's higher than the old one.

Yep, there are ways to patch the system so that rolling isn't so horrible, and I don't have a problem if a DM house rules to use one. Though even then, if there's an option just to take the average I'll use that.

 

[CM]

Threads like this make me appreciate the fact that I've been playing games with roughly the same group of friends for the last 20 years, and everyone is trustworthy and consistent in their behavior. Our worst problem is the one guy who likes to throw his dice when they roll bad.

 

[Kalshane]

Honestly, I've encountered more issues with DMs favoring a player whose pants they wanted to get into than actual established couples. I've also seen RL couples where both are players in the same game cause more issues than DM/Player couples.

I've also played in many games where it wasn't an issue at all.

It seriously depends on the people involved. Much like any other player/group dynamic.

 

[Halivar]

I've also seen RL couples where both are players in the same game cause more issues than DM/Player couples.

The spousal unit is always healed/buffed/rescued first. At least IMHXP. Well, except my wife. She's all like, "Oh, you fell down? Maybe if you weren't so useless, you'd still have hitpoints. /RAAAAWWWR I charge!"

 

[Salamandyr]

Honestly, I've encountered more issues with DMs favoring a player whose pants they wanted to get into than actual established couples.

This.