Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Skyscraper" data-source="post: 9542319" data-attributes="member: 48518">I have a single houserule in my game: no magic exists to bring creatures back from the dead. This means that revivify, raise dead, resurrection don't exist.Then, whatever houserule you use if any, it's a question of balancing your encounters. If you move your dial towards more difficult, well it will be... More difficult <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> If your encounters come without the possibility of resting, then it further increases difficulty. Managing encounters is story-related, so this usually takes some upstream work. With no coming back from the dead, the rules makes for more tension = grit.Removing cantrips (and some other suggestions in this thread) have significant impact on character building. For instance playing a warlock without cantrips makes no sense, so you're essentially ruling out a class. Non-magic using classes all become relatively stronger. I would avoid this kind of game-imbalancing change. As a player, I would not appreciate that kind of class modification, and if I wanted to play in that game, I would undoubtedly select a non-caster class so as not to have to live with the nerf. I mean, fighters, barbarians, rogues, they kick ass, getting the wind out of spellcasters by removing their go-to basic attacks is not a trivial modification.Whatever houserule your wish to implement to crank up the grit, I recommend discussing it with your players and getting consensus on the houserules beforehand. It will reduce frustration a lot on the players' side. For instance all my players buyed in on the no coming back from the dead rule. We discussed it, what is means, why I was proposing it. I asked them if they agreed to that rule or not, and if they did not I would simply not implement it. They bought it and we're playing with it.</blockquote>

Verification