OneDnD People That Have Actually Read the DMG: What Optional Rule(s) Do You Want To Get Expanded In One D&D?

Grantypants

Explorer
I like the idea of proficiency bonus being a die value rather than a set bonus, but in play it seems to slow down the game as you have more numbers to add every time.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
I used to love playing Rogues in 3.x, so when I first started playing 5e I used the optional Flanking and Tumble rules. But I quickly realized they weren't necessary. With the 5e Sneak Attack rules, Rogues no longer needed to be flanking. And with 5e's movement rules, I no longer needed to tumble into flanking position.

But 2 optional rules that I do like using are the Hitting Cover and Cleave rules on page 272. Hitting Cover leads to iconic hostage situations where you have to decide whether you want to lay down your weapons or try to snipe the person holding the hostage without damaging the hostage. Cleave just replaces the old 3.x feat and makes my Greataxe wielding Barbarian that much cooler. It also makes battles with many low-level minions go much quicker.
The Cleave rules are fun, but I don’t require that subsequent target to be undamaged. Definitely worth expanding on.
Bloodied (pg 248) Morale (pg 273) as part of a comprehensive fight or flight system.
I’d love to see those expanded beyond fight or flight rules.
 

I like the idea of proficiency bonus being a die value rather than a set bonus, but in play it seems to slow down the game as you have more numbers to add every time.
I think a lot of people like the idea. I like the idea, for example! But I liked the idea of the dice mechanic in Earthdawn! The practice? Not so much.

In practice Proficiency Dice does two major things:

1) It slows the game down by a noticeable amount.

2) It nukes Bounded Accuracy from orbit as @tetrasodium points out.

It gets particularly hilarious with stuff like Expertise, where you're rolling two dice! At level 5, for example, when you're rolling 2d6 for Expertise, you can get anywhere between +2, so the same as an Level 1 character without Expertise and +12, the same as Level 17 character with Expertise. That only gets worse as things go on. At 13 you're going between +2 (still!) and +20, which is like 60% higher than you could ever see even with Expertise at any level! It's adding more RNG into a game which already has an excessive RNG problem thanks to using d20s.

It just doesn't benefit the game, and illustrates a pernicious and unhelpful kind of house-rule-making that some DMs insist on engaging in, which is changing rules because they think it's cool to change rules, without actually understanding what they're doing. That should not be the sort of optional rule that's in the DMG and that people might try to emulate.
 


doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Fair. My concern was that bloodied and morale have a natural interaction in a fight or flight situation.
Absolutely. Bloodied just has so many ways it could turn dials in the system very intuitively, from “when bloodied, the Gnoll reaver gains THP and deals 1d10 extra damage on a successful melee weapon attack while it has those THP” to gating certain kinds of healing behind being bloodied (or behind a certain level of morale, for that matter).

I think you could use the class groups and stuff like bloodied to do cool stuff like “When a Warrior is bloodied, they can use a reaction to make one weapon attack against a target they can see. They regain this when they roll initiative or complete a short or long rest.”
 


Marandahir

Crown-Forester (he/him)
Spellpoints, but only for Sorcerers. Merge it with Sorcery Points into a single larger pool, and Sorcerers can choose to spend it on more spells per day or on altering a fewer number of spells per day.
 

tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
Spellpoints, but only for Sorcerers. Merge it with Sorcery Points into a single larger pool, and Sorcerers can choose to spend it on more spells per day or on altering a fewer number of spells per day.
Spell points is a mess in 5e because slot based casters mostly stop getting slots after the first for higher level slots while a handful of low level "iconic" spells punch way above what their slot levels & very low spell point costs justify. 5.5/6e will need to do a lot better there
 

Yaarel

Mind Mage
In the DMs Guide I want more development of optional abilities. It gives examples such as Honor and Sanity being new abilities.

I want Athletics and Perception as new abilities for a total of eight abilities.

• Strength / Constitution
• Dexterity / Athletics
• Intelligence / Perception
• Charisma / Wisdom

In this eightsome, there are four main saving throws: Constitution (Fortitude), Athletics (Reflex), Perception (!), and Wisdom (Will).

Perception is the defacto saving throw versus hiddenness, invisibility, and noticing any sensory flaws in disguises and illusions.

Athletics is mobility and bodily agily, including dodge and the AC bonus, it combines the inseparable Athletics jump/climb and Acrobatics fall/balance into a single swashbuckling ability score.

Meanwhile Dexterity continues to include manual dexterity Slight of Hand and cautious sensitive movements like Stealth, plus weapons that require a steady hand and precise aim, such as range weapons and finesse weapons.

(By the way, in this context, Charisma handles Honor and Wisdom handles Sanity.)

It takes some adjustment in the standard formating to make it practible to add these two abilities.
 

Yaarel

Mind Mage
Spellpoints, but only for Sorcerers. Merge it with Sorcery Points into a single larger pool, and Sorcerers can choose to spend it on more spells per day or on altering a fewer number of spells per day.
I am impressed with how well points per Short Rest balances.

The basic idea is, the mage gains a number of spell points equal to the fullcaster level + 1. The cost of any spell equals its slot level.

For example:

A level 5 Wizard has a spell pool equal to 6 points ( = level + 1 points).

The Wizard can use these points to cast two Fireballs (3rd slot x 2 = 6 point cost), or cast one of each Fireball, Invisibility, and Magic Missile (3rd slot + 2nd slot + 1st slot = 6 point cost).

When the pool depletes a Short or Long Rest can refresh it back to the maximum of 6 points.



This set up is amazingly balanced. It even works for the highest slot levels of 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th.

It should probably the standard mechanics for any character that uses spell points, regardless of class.
 

pnewman

Adventurer
As written the variant rule about playing on a grid only allows for square grids. I would like to see an option for hex grid maps as well.
 


Gorck

Prince of Dorkness
I am impressed with how well points per Short Rest balances.

The basic idea is, the mage gains a number of spell points equal to the fullcaster level + 1. The cost of any spell equals its slot level.

For example:

A level 5 Wizard has a spell pool equal to 6 points ( = level + 1 points).

The Wizard can use these points to cast two Fireballs (3rd slot x 2 = 6 point cost), or cast one of each Fireball, Invisibility, and Magic Missile (3rd slot + 2nd slot + 1st slot = 6 point cost).

When the pool depletes a Short or Long Rest can refresh it back to the maximum of 6 points.



This set up is amazingly balanced. It even works for the highest slot levels of 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th.

It should probably the standard mechanics for any character that uses spell points, regardless of class.
Normally, a 17th level Wizard can cast 1 9th level spell per day. Unless I’m missing something, with your method, a 17th level Wizard would be able to cast 2 9th level spells per Short Rest. Are you sure that’s balanced?
 

Yaarel

Mind Mage
Normally, a 17th level Wizard can cast 1 9th level spell per day. Unless I’m missing something, with your method, a 17th level Wizard would be able to cast 2 9th level spells per Short Rest.
Yeah. But. The level 17th level Wizard using these spell slots will never be able to cast a 9th-slot spell, an 8th-slot spell, a 7th-slot spell, a 6th-slot spell, two 5th-slot spells, three 4th-slot spells, and three 3rd-slot spells DURING THE SAME COMBAT ENCOUNTER!

If the Wizard depletes all the spell points on only two spells, the Wizard will be vulnerable to any encounters afterward, and gaining a 1-hour Short Rest may or may not be easy.

The genius of the Short Rest spell pool is, it keeps the size of spell pool small thereby making "broken" "novas" impossible.
 

Yaarel

Mind Mage
I became aware of the Short Rest spell point system when looking into third-party Psion classes. (Both LaserLlama and KibblesTasty.)

Initially, I strongly opposed psionics using spell points because I want normal D&D mechanics − nothing fringe or redundant.

But looking into the Short Rest spell points I am amazed by how solid it is. Every D&D class should be using these Short Rest spell points! It should be the "normal" D&D mechanics.
 

MGibster

Legend
After a certain point, the accumulation of gold in 5th edition was superfluous as there just wasn't a lot to spend it on. I'd like to see them expand their ideas for alternative rewards for player characters that aren't based on treasure. Alternatively, I'd like more ideas on what PCs could do with all that treasure.
 

Yaarel

Mind Mage
Regarding distances. I want all distances standardized to:

Distance Upto: Range Type
• 10 feet (3 m): Melee / Reach
• 30 feet (10 m): Near / Close / Move / Throw
• 100 feet (30 m): Far / Distant
• 300 feet (100 m): Mid Range / Bowshot
• 1000 feet (300 m): Long Range (bowshot at disadvantage)

Anything beyond 30 feet is Far and beyond 1000 feet is Remote.

The main purpose of simplifying and standardizing distances is for theater of the mind. In this case, the only ranges that matter are Melee and Near during combat encounters. Things are either within a Move or Throw or not. But the longer ranges occasionally happen when seeing or interacting with things in the distance.

Most spells have a range of about 100 feet.

A bow is reliable enough upto 300 feet (a city block or a football field).
 

The Myopic Sniper

Adventurer
I would prefer it if they just did not have any optional rules in the DMG and focused the DMG on all the tools that DMs need to run the game as well as instructions on how to DM. If it is important enough to have an optional rule to support a setting, place that in the core book for that setting. Otherwise, just come up with standard rules for those situations or create feats for players who really like the playstyle that the optional rules create.
 

Marandahir

Crown-Forester (he/him)
Yeah. But. The level 17th level Wizard using these spell slots will never be able to cast a 9th-slot spell, an 8th-slot spell, a 7th-slot spell, a 6th-slot spell, two 5th-slot spells, three 4th-slot spells, and three 3rd-slot spells DURING THE SAME COMBAT ENCOUNTER!

If the Wizard depletes all the spell points on only two spells, the Wizard will be vulnerable to any encounters afterward, and gaining a 1-hour Short Rest may or may not be easy.

The genius of the Short Rest spell pool is, it keeps the size of spell pool small thereby making "broken" "novas" impossible.
Are you sure rests aren't that easy to get?

My experience is that the party rests the amount of times = to the loudest member of the party who nova'd their abilities out. We want to disinsentivise the 5MWD. This just turns it into the 5-Minute-Work-Hour, thus making it far easier to recharge without losing everything (1 hour is far easier to rest thoroughly than 6).
 

Yaarel

Mind Mage
Are you sure rests aren't that easy to get?

My experience is that the party rests the amount of times = to the loudest member of the party who nova'd their abilities out. We want to disinsentivise the 5MWD. This just turns it into the 5-Minute-Work-Hour, thus making it far easier to recharge without losing everything (1 hour is far easier to rest thoroughly than 6).
We can compare the 5e Warlock, with regard to Short Rest mechanics.

The spell point system converts the Warlock chassis into spell points. The difference is the Warlock progression comes in big lumps at each slot increase, whereas the spell point system progression increments smoothly increasing at 1 point at each new level. Overall the difference between the Short Rest slots and the level+1 Short Rest points is a wash.

In all the years of 5e, I dont recall anyone complaining that the Sorcerer spellcasting is too powerful. I only hear it isnt enough for some player preferences. Moreover, I hear Warlock players complain they have a difficult time convincing other players to rest − tho that might change if Wizard and other casters are Short-Resting too because of using the spell point system.

Going from my experience, the 1-hour Short Rest is only possible if there are no nearby threats − in other words, there is a natural narrative pause in the adventure, when an 8-hour Long Rest is just as easy.

In sum, the Short Rest spell pool balances solidly. We can the see the Warlock perform when effectively maximizing the expenditure for each spell. The main difference is, the spell points allow the option of dividing the maximal slot into several lesser spells. The Short Rest spell point chassis balances remarkably.
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top