D&D 5E Musings about weapon damage.

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin
The issue is also compounded IMO by the fact 5E has typically a 60-70% attack success rate. This also makes things boring to me and my group. When we did our first 1-20 game, PCs were hitting so often due to bounded accuracy that we got more excited when someone MISSED!!!

So, now all attacks are at disadvantage, ability checks are straight d20, and all saves have advantage. FYI, we allow sources to stack, so you can have multiple sources of advantage, etc.

This creates a game were PCs succeed on attacks 36-49% instead of 60-70%. By lowering the HP bloat, combats take maybe an extra round typically compared to RAW combat.

Another thing we decided is when you upcast a spell, you don't gain additional dice but gain additional MAXIMAL die. You cast sleep for 5d8 at 1st level, but at 3rd level it is 5d8 + 16 (not 2d8, but maxed 16). This makes upcasting much more useful and appealing. You cast cure wounds for 1d8+4 or upcast it at level 2 for 1d8+12 (normal +4 and 8 for maximum 1d8 extra). Yes, this makes spells more powerful if upcast, but you are trading off of casting spells from higher levels. It works nicely for us.

All of this changes, and many more, keep the game moving quickly, make it more exciting IMO, and reduces the dreaded hp bloat.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

HammerMan

Legend
Yep. We just removed CON bonus from adding to hit points. Most monsters are now 50-70% of their RAW hp.

It was a mistake of bounded accuracy, IMO, to bloat hp and damage.
I keep playing with giving everyone 3HD at level 1 (but down gradeing everyone 1 step so fighters D8, thieves and clerics d6, wizards d4) then only add extra HD at even levels, with odd levels getting a fixed 1,2,or3. Take Con mod out of HP, but keep it for bonus per HD spent for healing... make 1/2 to 3/4 of the healing in the game spend HD... and you have a much faster deadlier game.
 

HammerMan

Legend
The issue is also compounded IMO by the fact 5E has typically a 60-70% attack success rate. This also makes things boring to me and my group. When we did our first 1-20 game, PCs were hitting so often due to bounded accuracy that we got more excited when someone MISSED!!!
I wonder about this alot... would I rather miss, and have low hp or almost always hit but lots of HP... I too see this
 

Cruentus

Adventurer
I wonder about this alot... would I rather miss, and have low hp or almost always hit but lots of HP... I too see this
I did some mock combats in Ad&d 1e (rolled up a Lv 1 fighter, and an orc). They spent about 4-5 rounds missing each other, and the hits tended to either do half damage, or down the opponent in one shot, so it was definitely "hit or miss". Pun intended.

It was also a totally different feel than 5e, where its almost as if its a "failure" if you're not hitting or doing something every round. Spending a lot of time missing could be boring for some. However, it did make the rounds go fast! Fighter: Roll d20. Miss. Orc: Roll d20: miss. Rounds went quick and when you did hit, it was a big deal.

That element (low hit rates), can be adjusted via AC. If you give Orcs an 8 AC or a 9 (just shield), then the fighter is hitting 50% with no mods. Adjust as you want for 'hittiness'. Likewise, you can adjust monster HD to hit characters less. Its all in what you're looking for.

Heck, I'm playing an RPG game via email of Wolves of God, a Dark Ages Britain setting, and my first level characters have 3-8hp, and are having to be very tactical about fighting a single wolf. Its scary, and I'm loving it.
 

HammerMan

Legend
I did some mock combats in Ad&d 1e (rolled up a Lv 1 fighter, and an orc). They spent about 4-5 rounds missing each other, and the hits tended to either do half damage, or down the opponent in one shot, so it was definitely "hit or miss". Pun intended.
that is how I remember 2e at low level as well
 

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin
@HammerMan and @Cruentus

Our system of attack disadvantage and lower hit rates, coupled with slightly improved damage and lower hit points, does have the effect of:

You hit less, but your hits count for more (as opposed to RAW you hit a lot but they don't do much).

Now, people get excited about the hits! No longer is it: "yawn oh, look, I just hit 3 out of 4 times... guess I'll roll a bunch of damage and hardly hurt the beasty...".

For anyone wondering, it does NOT slow down the game. Instead of rolling damage all the time, you are rolling attacks. The time factors of hit less, roll damage less taking extra rounds is balanced out against the hit a lot, but have to roll damage a lot.

If either of you, or anyone else, is considering this type of play, I highly recommend it. When hits are less common, actually hitting becomes more exciting! :D
 

Weiley31

Legend
The only problem with the idea is that, obviously, not all Elves are going to care about wielding a bow or a sword, so there should be an option for magicians as well.
True. Plus, there would be no way to accurately have that rule follow if the Character decided to use/do the Gandalf Fighting-Style of Sword/Staff.

Then again, I could always allow PCs to swap out one or all four of their Racial Weapons options with a substitute of their choice, then apply my Weapon Familiarity/Racial/Heritage Weapon house rule.

There's also this method too:



Almost in a way, like the idea of the Monk Weapon grouping in 5E. Applying that logic/idea for wizards would allow them to do the Sword/Staff Gandalf combo if a magic user wanted too. Druids get a bit more freedomish in things but yea. These two proficiency groups could be applied to their appropriate classes and then, along with their Racial Weapon options, can increase the Damage Die of these weapons by one or two steps.




Look, I blame Neverwinter Nights 1 for a majority of my ideas/different takes on adding/changing stuff for 5E.
 


An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top