D&D 5E Idea that will most players will hate, but I think addresses a mechanical issue in game

[Oofta]

I had a player quit because I had a set of Wolves (which have Pack Tactics) focus on him. This char never went into even Death Saves over about 5 sessions...not once. But he felt my game was "too hard".

The only chars I have ever killed in the past 3 years were 3 out of 6 char party in one session because the players came up with an idiotic plan. (Split the party 3 ways going into what clearly was a trap).

But I am considered a "Killer DM" because of that, and often, chars do go into Death Saves.

So yes, more and more, I see players that are indeed "delicate flowers". A good player can whip up a char in about 10 minutes, sans backstory. But then they will invest 4 days into said backstory, and get very upset when the char is on the verge of death.

I'm pretty sure every PC in my game has been making death saves at one point or other. I'm sure it's been more than once for some, but it's not like I keep track.

On the other hand, back in 3.x days I was quite active in Living Greyhawk, the public game similar to AL. There was one guy that was only happy when they dominated combat (he played a wizard) and would pout if anyone dared attack their PC, much less knock them unconscious.

So it's nothing new. But once a PC is unconscious I don't generally continue to attack, although animals may start dragging them off. I try to spread the "love" and if one PC has gone down every other fight because they're a monk that doesn't have great tactics (purely hypothetical of course) I'll make an effort to focus on someone else.

There's a big difference between putting the fear, and very real possibility of death on the table and actually killing PCs. If PCs are just a pile of numbers and stats to you that can be replaced in 10 minutes, that's fine. It's what I do when I attempt to run an elf because they always die after a few sessions anyway (it's a curse).

Discuss lethality level during your session 0. I explain that death is never off the table completely and we go from there. Then if I get a player that pouts if I dare target them I may have to discuss expectations with them, but I don't see any reason to believe it's any sort of general trend.

People who can't stand to have their PCs attacked is nothing new.

 

[Horwath]

How about:

all melee weapons use either STR or DEX for attack and damage,
all ranged weapons use DEX for attack and damage,

have minimum STR for ALL weapons and armors. Maybe none for dagger and padded armor or similar.

Then you can add +2 or +4 to min STR for dual wield.
Or have several bow base damage. from 1d4 for STR 8, to 2d6 for STR 20

this way, you can use DEX for all attacks, both melee and ranged and for AC, but you would still be limited in how much STR you invested.

 

[Minigiant]

I'd like going back to some old school ideas

Typre	To hit	To damage
Normal Melee	Str	Dex
Normal Ranged	Dex	Wis
Finesse Melee	Dex	Int
Composite Bow Ranged	Dex	Str
Thrown Ranged	Hit	Dex
Daggers	Dex	Dex
Great Weapon	Str	Con

Type	Spells to Hit	Spell DC
Arcane	CHA	INT
Divine	WIS	CHA
Primal/Nature	CHA	WIS
Elemental/Titanic	CON`	WIS

 

[Vince_Snetterton]

I'd like going back to some old school ideas

Typre	To hit	To damage
Normal Melee	Str	Dex
Normal Ranged	Dex	Wis
Finesse Melee	Dex	Int
Composite Bow Ranged	Dex	Str
Thrown Ranged	Hit	Dex
Daggers	Dex	Dex
Great Weapon	Str	Con

Type	Spells to Hit	Spell DC
Arcane	CHA	INT
Divine	WIS	CHA
Primal/Nature	CHA	WIS
Elemental/Titanic	CON`	WIS

That seems like a solid abstraction. It strikes a decent balance between more complicated math for players and realism, while at the same time force players into hard choices when making chars. It is pretty clear that I think the game should be harder.

 

[Scars Unseen]

I'd like going back to some old school ideas

Typre	To hit	To damage
Normal Melee	Str	Dex
Normal Ranged	Dex	Wis
Finesse Melee	Dex	Int
Composite Bow Ranged	Dex	Str
Thrown Ranged	Hit	Dex
Daggers	Dex	Dex
Great Weapon	Str	Con

Type	Spells to Hit	Spell DC
Arcane	CHA	INT
Divine	WIS	CHA
Primal/Nature	CHA	WIS
Elemental/Titanic	CON`	WIS

I like that a fair bit (though what is "hit" for thrown?), but I'm still kind of growing to the idea of making caster requirements by spell instead of by class, forcing them to make decisions between specialized effectiveness and widespread utility.

 

[Minigiant]

That seems like a solid abstraction. It strikes a decent balance between more complicated math for players and realism, while at the same time force players into hard choices when making chars. It is pretty clear that I think the game should be harder.

Well the goal shouldn't be difficulty.The goal should be balancing the ability scores in reliance and creation of decision points.

MAD tend to work best and more commonly seen in video games because the game can do all the math for you and display the result in the UI.

Like If I were to make a D&D video game and were not beholden to the modifier system, my DC, hit, and damage calculation formulas would be complex.