D&D 5E Krynn's Free Feats: setting-specific or the future of the game?

[Micah Sweet]

what version of D&D did you play with broken rib rules and cutting hands off mid combat WITHOUT a sword of sharpness?

Someone was complaining about overnight recovery from injuries. I just pointed out that 5e has virtually no examples of injuries anyway.

 

[Greg Benage]

And yet, despite that, Regenerate remains a spell in the game, "just in case"...

Chekov's sword of sharpness. It's gonna happen eventually...

 

[James Gasik]

Gary has this to say on page 82 of the 1e DMG.

EDIT: a lot of old school players tell me that characters instantly died at 0 hit points back in the day, apparently that wasn't the case! I knew Death's Door was an optional rule in 2e, but apparently it's something that was intended in AD&D.

 

[Maxperson]

It doesn't even cover broken ribs! Lazy design.

ETA: I do love the "scar here, eyepatch there" sentence though.

My character has eyepatches in places you can't see.

 

[Maxperson]

I don't know, I haven't read the 5e rules, but I imagine it's just as rotten and vile. I remember reading a developer weigh in on specific injuries once (maybe in Dragon), and they said the reason they didn't do this is because, by 5th level, the average adventuring party would be a sorry bunch of heroes lacking noses and limbs.

Back during AD&D I used this rule for 5-10 sessions. I quickly realized that it was no fun at all to have PCs hopping around without leg, missing primary arms, or just so scarred up that the player doesn't enjoy the appearance of the PC because it's so far from what he initially envisioned.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I don't know, I haven't read the 5e rules, but I imagine it's just as rotten and vile. I remember reading a developer weigh in on specific injuries once (maybe in Dragon), and they said the reason they didn't do this is because, by 5th level, the average adventuring party would be a sorry bunch of heroes lacking noses and limbs.

so you have been complaining about rules you never read? so what is it you dislike if you don't even know how to play?

And yet, despite that, Regenerate remains a spell in the game, "just in case"...

good thing it is. We have used it to regrow limbs 3 times in the last 5 campaigns (well twice in 1, then 3 campaigns didn't need it then once in the last one). BTW that is why I know you don't regenerate limbs overnight. It has come up. (1 leg 1 arm 1 hand)

 

[TwoSix]

Someone was complaining about overnight recovery from injuries. I just pointed out that 5e has virtually no examples of injuries anyway.

This. If you're narrating hit point less as organ damage or fractures, you're stepping outside the rules as presented and are going to have to make a lot more rulings. And the game logic of how hit points work means you're going to see a corresponding amount of narrative inconsistencies.

 

[James Gasik]

so you have been complaining about rules you never read? so what is it you dislike if you don't even know how to play?

good thing it is. We have used it to regrow limbs 3 times in the last 5 campaigns (well twice in 1, then 3 campaigns didn't need it then once in the last one). BTW that is why I know you don't regenerate limbs overnight. It has come up. (1 leg 1 arm 1 hand)

The 5e rules for Lingering Wounds.

EDIT: I knew the instant I read my own post that I didn't specify, but then I was like, "surely, anyone who sees what I'm replying to will know what I mean..." LOL.

 

[TwoSix]

good thing it is. We have used it to regrow limbs 3 times in the last 5 campaigns (well twice in 1, then 3 campaigns didn't need it then once in the last one). BTW that is why I know you don't regenerate limbs overnight. It has come up. (1 leg 1 arm 1 hand)

The real problem with regenerate is the material component cost. Seriously, it'll cost you an arm and a leg.

 

[Jer]

On the one hand, I dislike the idea of making feats required because one of the strengths of introducing this edition of D&D to new players is that they have a small number of meaningful choices when they create a character, and they don't really have to know a lot about how the game works to make those choices right now and have a character to play quickly. The biggest "small" choices most new players have to make are what spells to take or if they're a cleric, warlock or sorcerer, what subclass to take as well - which can be a bit tough for some new players (though actually only cleric has ever been an issue IME - the warlock patron and the sorcerer bloodline are both obvious hooks for a new player to gravitate towards and they'll pick whichever one sounds the coolest to them - the cleric domain choice ends up being a bit less exciting and so they have more questions about it).

On the other hand, once they know the game most of the players I've taught like to pick feats over ASIs except for the really casual ones who will take a +2 over looking through the feat lists every time. So it's not like they're adding that much complexity.

Hopefully they'll keep the list of free feats at 1st level that aren't tied to a specific background small, like in the UA release, to keep the choices obvious for for new players. That's my only real reservation.