Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hillsy7" data-source="post: 7165341" data-attributes="member: 6689191">Ok - firstly well done for posting your homebrewing methodology the right way. Namely, "I don't like this", rather than "This is clearly bad and broken and WHY DIDN'T WotC ASK ME TO DESIGN 5TH EDITION?! WHYYYY!!!!!"....so much kudos there!I've got some questions that may seem facetious but aren't meant that way.1) Have you played much 4th Edition? I'm guessing so because you used the [W] syntax. What you are doing is literally turning 5th edition basic attacks into 4th edition style at-wills. Which is fine, but it does beg the question why you've switched to 5th edition. Just because 4th Ed isn't the newest edition, doesn't make your preference for it Bad or Wrong.2) Do you understand the design decisions that have gone into extra attack and cantrips (not just with each other, but compared to the old 3.5 BAB system)? The choices made mean that cantrips and extra attacks (mostly) work in specific design ways so they have a different feel over and above just the maths. Spell cantrips tend to have much swingier damage (4d8 on a hit) compared melee attacks, that not only have multiple attack rolls (flattening out damage average) but have a much higher baseline because of modifier damage. This makes melee attacks and cantrips feel different, while DPR-wise being balanced.3) Are you playing in a game where cantrips are used much more than spells other than at the lower levels (before cantrip progression and extra attack)? Most of my experience is that cantrips are a last resort once you're out of spells (want to conserve a couple) and you don't want to pick up a Crossbow (a la 3.5). That's why they are built like mini-spells (swingy all dice damage and no mods with no damage on a miss/save rather than half). So in a combat of 5 rounds, you're probably casting 3 spells and a couple of cantrips. They are hardly the core structure of the caster class, and shouldn't really be considered the pinnacle of game design. (NB: because of static damage, swinging a long sword at level 5 with 18 STR gives you 17 damage average per turn. A level 17 ray of frost does 18 average - this is to keep a melee character on par with a spellcasters bigger spells).At the end of the day, it's your call and to be fair you've couched it in a way that tells us all it's just something personal to you, which is fine. If you want to tinker with the rules, the guys at D&D actively encourage it - it's guide, a starting point. If it doesn't provide the gaming experience you crave - or you simply want to mess about and personalise it (Hell, I know that feeling....it's FUN!) - more power to you.However, I will say take a bit of time and have a real think about why you feel this change is necessary, for the sake of your own games. If it's because you and your friends want their own personal experience, great. If it's for fun, or just to try out, superb! But if it's because you fundamentally feel that WotC did a bad job that's ruining your enjoyment of the game - I think you need to do significantly more research before you start breaking apart the fundamental balance 5e has in the game (deliberate choices made by experience game designers), because you might seriously damage the game for your players.Or better still, just build your own gaming system - you're not beholden then to any of the structure and inherent tradeoffs that exist in D&D 5e....you clearly seem to like the numerical crunch of the thing, so build your own RPG mechanics. I've got 4 or 5 I like to muck about with occasionally because I like the probability and mathematical challenges they throw up.</blockquote>

Verification