My philosophy on house rules is to make as few as possible for the desired result. I want to find either a fulcrum point that allows me to get what I want with a minimum amount of change, or make targeted changes that only hit the most egregrious problems. I'm happy to say that 5e requires a lot less that 3e did, but they tend to be more significant. If someone new joins my group the game shouldn't feel like it's my own version of D&D to them.
An example of the first type is that I find it conceptually offensive that you are stuck only ever knowing a limited number of cantrips, despite being able to know (either automatically or potentially) every high level spell on your list. Phenomenal cosmic powers...still can't figure out
mending. My solution is to allow prepared casters to prepare additional cantrips with a spell slot. You can still cast them at will if you do so. For cleric's and druids, you already "know" all of them. For wizards you have to add them to your spell list. So the cantrips known becomes simply your signature cantrips that you don't have to spend a preparation on to have ready. (For spontaneous casters, I just allow them the option to retrain cantrips when the level like they can retrain other spells.)
An example of the second type is the issue with the Berserker you brought up. Here's my house rule:
FRENZY
You can use this feature a number of times equal to your Constitution modifier (a minimum of once) without suffering any adverse effect. Each time you use this feature again before you finish a long rest, you suffer one level of exhaustion when your rage ends.
I very rarely nerf anything in the rules. That's annoying for players. So if I'm adjusting a PC feature, it generally means buffing something that stands out like a sore thumb as weak. However, I think it is important to point out, that 5e PCs are
powerful. You should almost never provide an across the board bonus to them unless you want to make challenges even more trivial. Fix imbalanced class features you dislike, but don't just say all PCs get an extra feat or something. Really, it will detract from fun more than enhance it unless your party likes to roll over everything and fight a stream of improbably powerful monsters you're continually throwing at them to challenge them.
Here's the things I have or am considering house ruling in 5E.
- No "basic" humans; all humans use the Variant traits. I also give humans 2 free skills instead of one, to bring them closer to the Half-Elf (after I saw two players in the same game choose half-elf over human).
I'd advise against giving them the extra skill. They don't really need it. I assume the Variant human is the default in more worlds, because the stats make more sense to me that way conceptually, but I allow the other one as the "variant" for a human who intentionally tries to be good at everything.
[*]Saving Throws: Strongly considering applying proficiency bonus to all saves and removing "trained saves" or switching to strict +2s like in 4E; save DCs would become 10+proficiency.
I'd discourage this. Don't give them extra save proficiencies, don't give them half proficiencies, don't let them take the Resilient feat more than the once they are allowed. Just don't do it. Having those sorts of weakness is one of the things that at least tries to help them not steamroll the game.
[*]Starting HP: I grant Con score to starting HP.
Again, this is just making an easy edition into in kindergarten mode.
[*]Barbarian: I really want to buff the Berserker, since my current Barbarian player really disliked it (saying "it's really easy to get bonus action attacks"), but I don't know what to do.
Agreed! Feel free to steal my version above if you like. I developed it after a long discussion and mathematical analysis a few months ago...I'm not sure if it was old enough to still be on here, but it might be.
[*]Cleric: I offer a "robed cleric" option, giving the Monk's Wis to AC instead of armor and shield proficiencies.
Perfectly good idea. I eventually decided I didn't want to mess with it, but this is one of those things I've wanted to do in some editions.
[*]Fighter: To buff the Fighter's TWFing, I grant an extra TWFing attack at level 11 along with the fighter's 2nd Extra Attack; at this point, when you take a bonus action to make your TWFing attack, you get two. Every other class is reasonably balanced when it comes to TWFing.
If this makes it do more damage than duelist but less damage than great weapon style, then it's probably a pretty cool idea. Just make sure it doesn't do more than great weapon style (not counting the feat).
[*]Monk: Working on an altered Four Elements monk, siting the Shadow monk and Sun Soul monk's spells as evidence.
Take a look at this before you do all the work:
Way of the Four Elements Remastered
I rarely use other people's home brews, but this is good enough to make an exception.
[*]Ranger: I've tweaked favored enemy (baked hunter's mark into it) and I've tweaked the Beast Master's pet (It's in my signature).
This is one that is notoriously hard to fix in a way that pleases everyone, but you might want to check out the recent UA article for the official alternative in playtest state.
[*]Warlock: I've altered the Pact of the Blade; it now works as a melee Eldritch Blast. Eldritch Blast is a class ability instead of a cantrip, and it scales with Warlock level not character level. Agonizing Blast is baked in, and the blade pact invocations are being swapped out for something else (still working on it).
Yes, pact of the blade needs something. It is one of those sore thumb weaknesses. Here is the fix I ended up making after the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide introduced greenflame blade and booming blade.
Thirsting Blade
When you use your action to cast a cantrip that includes a melee attack with a weapon, you can make one weapon attack with your pact blade as a bonus action.
Note that that is in addition to the normal feature of Thirsting Blade rather than a replacement. This gives you the choice of whichever works best for your current character's set up (but they are inherently mutually exclusive on any particular turn).
[*]Weapon "styles": Strongly considering giving characters who use a one-handed weapon with nothing in their off-hand (no shield, no second weapon) a +2 bonus to hit; primarily this is to give the rogue a choice over TWFing.
Interesting idea. The concept of receiving limited benefit from using a single weapon style has bothered me also. My current solution is making the dueling fighting style also grant a +1 AC bonus if you aren't using a shield. That way you are only giving up 1 AC for style or hand availability, rather than 2.
[*]Ability Checks: I make ample use of 3E skill check DCs (modified) as I like rules more than guidelines.
Just watch out for the difficulty. 3e need significant nerfs (at least -5, and more for higher DCs) to get in line with 5e's intended difficulties. Also, a suggestion someone made that I think works great for conceptual purposes is to add the word "challenge" after the DC difficulties in lieu of task or action. So a DC 10 isn't an easy task (you're typical person fails 45% of the time!) but it is an "easy challenge."
[*]Initiative: I allow for initiative delaying and full actions on readied actions (the former because we're accustomed to it, the latter because readied actions favor spellcasters and rogues over multiattackers).
This will slow down the game, so keep that in mind. It was left out very intentionally. Also, remember that spellcasters have to concentrate on the spell while it is readied (even if it isn't a spell that normally requires concentration), so it can be disrupted if you hurt them and they fail their Con save. You have a point about rogues though, but keep in mind that readying makes it harder for them to maneuver into position where they need to for a sneak attack.
