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

CleverNickName

Limit Break Dancing
I guess my experience with Proficiency Dice is different.

That optional rule hasn't slowed our game down at all. But that's because we play virtually on Roll20, and Proficiency Dice is an option you toggle on in the game setup menu. Once it's toggled on, nobody ever has to think about it again--it's rolled automatically in the background. After 3 or 4 gaming sessions, my players and I had forgotten that we agreed to use them.

I can't really say that it has broken bounded accuracy either...certainly not "nuking it from orbit," as some have suggested. The game feels more swingy now, and skill checks and attack rolls are somewhat less predictable. Not by a lot, though...it didn't ruin the game. Like I said, after 3 or 4 gaming sessions we had forgotten they were there.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
I guess my experience with Proficiency Dice is different.

That optional rule hasn't slowed our game down at all. But that's because we play virtually on Roll20, and Proficiency Dice is an option you toggle on in the game setup menu. Once it's toggled on, nobody ever has to think about it again--it's rolled automatically in the background. After 3 or 4 gaming sessions, my players and I had forgotten that we agreed to use them.

I can't really say that it has broken bounded accuracy either...certainly not "nuking it from orbit," as some have suggested. The game feels a lot more swingy now, and skill checks and attack rolls are somewhat less predictable. Not by a lot, though...it didn't ruin the game. Like I said, after 3 or 4 gaming sessions we had forgotten they were there.
Mine was similar. It doesn't cause measurable slowdown & bounded accuracy is broken from the getgo even before using proficiency dice so the odds of rolling below standard proficiency values more than negates the chance of rolling above
 

rules.mechanic

Craft homebrewer
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.
I think the higher level spells are still an issue. Warlock slots only go up to 5th level spells. Mystic Arcanum then allows you 6th-9th level spells, but only one of each per long rest. And these are also not regained by the Eldritch Master feature. So 1x per long rest really is ingrained for 6th to 9th level spells for casters.
 

rules.mechanic

Craft homebrewer
I guess my experience with Proficiency Dice is different.

That optional rule hasn't slowed our game down at all. But that's because we play virtually on Roll20, and Proficiency Dice is an option you toggle on in the game setup menu. Once it's toggled on, nobody ever has to think about it again--it's rolled automatically in the background. After 3 or 4 gaming sessions, my players and I had forgotten that we agreed to use them.

I can't really say that it has broken bounded accuracy either...certainly not "nuking it from orbit," as some have suggested. The game feels more swingy now, and skill checks and attack rolls are somewhat less predictable. Not by a lot, though...it didn't ruin the game. Like I said, after 3 or 4 gaming sessions we had forgotten they were there.
Proficiency Dice can be used to improve bounded accuracy. When you have advantage, you only roll the proficiency die once. When you have expertise, that's when you roll your proficiency die with advantage (instead of the current system of rolling two proficiency dice and using both).
 

rules.mechanic

Craft homebrewer
Other DMG optional rules that could be looked at are Degrees of Failure & Success at a Cost. This could be better defined and also expanded to include Degree of Success. It could even be expanded to the other d20 tests with saves and even attack rolls, but I know that's more contentious!
 

Clint_L

Hero
I want the DM's Guide to read more like, well, a guide. Right now, aside from magic items, it is probably the least used sourcebook in the game, and the Player's Handbook is the text that really matters.

DMing is hard. The first half of the DM's Guide, if not more, should be about teaching players to DM, including small adventures, similar to the ones in Explorer's Guide to Wildemount.
 

Yaarel

Mind Mage
I think the higher level spells are still an issue. Warlock slots only go up to 5th level spells. Mystic Arcanum then allows you 6th-9th level spells, but only one of each per long rest. And these are also not regained by the Eldritch Master feature. So 1x per long rest really is ingrained for 6th to 9th level spells for casters.
Initially, I assumed the upper tier slots would be a problem. But, for the Short Rest spell points, with character level +1 points where cost=slot, it works fine.
 

Clint_L

Hero
As we all know, no one reads the D&D 5e Dungeon Master's Guide...
So, that's what I want OneD&D to address. Make the DM's Guide something worth reading, rather than just an expensive book you have to buy solely for the Magic items lists. Or else move magic items to the PHB and make the DM's Guide completely optional.

That said, sure, include/expand some optional rules in it. But that shouldn't be what the book is all about, unless it is retitled DM's Optional Rules for D&D, Totally Optional, U Don't Need to Buy This, Guide.
 

Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
As we all know, no one reads the D&D 5e Dungeon Master's Guide. However, for the few people on this site that have, what optional parts of it do you think should be expanded upon in the One D&D playtest?

By "expanded", I mean given heavy revisions the same way that Inspiration and Exhaustion have been revised in the current playtest documents.

There are 3 optional rules in the DMG that currently come to mind:
  1. The Loyalty Score: Found in Chapter 4 of the DMG, the Loyalty Score is a way for the DM to keep track of how loyal party-member NPCs are to the party. Currently, it's pretty bare-bones and has only been used in one official adventure before (Out of the Abyss), so I think revising it and making the rules more important could help in future official adventures.
  2. Proficiency Dice: I like the idea of Proficiency Dice. I've never used it, because I don't think my players would like it, but I like the idea of it. However, revising Proficiency Dice to apply only in certain situations could help make it be used more frequently.
  3. Flanking: Currently, flanking gives people that attack a flanked target advantage on the attack roll, which is probably too effective. If revised to be a bonus to hit (maybe a d4 or +1 per flanking creature), then it might be used more, adding more strategy to D&D 5e combat.
What about you? What other optional rules do you think can/should be revised and/or expanded? Do you have any thoughts on the optional rules I listed and possible revisions/expansions for them?

So a few thoughts.

First, I think the use of the DMG for optional rules is the best use possible. It is supposed to fire the imagination. For those who choose to engage with it, the book is supposed to give you ideas and options. Not all of them are going to things a DM is going to want for their table, but some of them will be the seeds for how a table is going to adjust the game to make it play the way they want. It's fully in keeping with the character and the history of D&D that a primary purpose of this rulebook is to remind you that the table, not the book, is in charge of the rules.

That said, I think the flanking (and other miniature rules) are both a decent start but also under-developed. I'd prefer that the DMG, instead of having it either more developed or less developed, instead have a description of the differences between grid/minis/TOTM play, and have more advanced mini play as a separate supplement. Flanking is good if you like minis, but people that are really into the combat modifiers and minis are going to want a lot more.

What I think might be interesting is having a more built-out and "themed section" with grouped-together optional rules ... as if they were various levers. For example, if you want to ratchet up the resource management and grittiness, there's a bunch of different optional rules ... why not have them together in one section, as different aspects? Or if you prefer a more narrative approach (or more player control over fiction) have those ideas together?
 

tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
So a few thoughts.

First, I think the use of the DMG for optional rules is the best use possible. It is supposed to fire the imagination. For those who choose to engage with it, the book is supposed to give you ideas and options. Not all of them are going to things a DM is going to want for their table, but some of them will be the seeds for how a table is going to adjust the game to make it play the way they want. It's fully in keeping with the character and the history of D&D that a primary purpose of this rulebook is to remind you that the table, not the book, is in charge of the rules.

That said, I think the flanking (and other miniature rules) are both a decent start but also under-developed. I'd prefer that the DMG, instead of having it either more developed or less developed, instead have a description of the differences between grid/minis/TOTM play, and have more advanced mini play as a separate supplement. Flanking is good if you like minis, but people that are really into the combat modifiers and minis are going to want a lot more.

What I think might be interesting is having a more built-out and "themed section" with grouped-together optional rules ... as if they were various levers. For example, if you want to ratchet up the resource management and grittiness, there's a bunch of different optional rules ... why not have them together in one section, as different aspects? Or if you prefer a more narrative approach (or more player control over fiction) have those ideas together?
You don't need "minis" for grid play, I remember doing it with candy & graph paper many years ago. With that said VTTs have grown a lot since 2014 & support grid play full on without needing anything more than an image & simple web app. Levelup has a full set of tokens for free download. Paizo has announced that they are working with caeora to put out their full set of monsters in a token pack early next year . Then we all know wotc announced they are putting out a vtt in a couple years.

What tactical grid combat needs more than liking minis or a "separate supplement" is core rules that make efforts to support rather than thwart it as a playstyle. When short range on a ranged weapon is 30 5 foot squares in a system built around 5 foot increments for everything & there are feats to double that or add 60 feet to spell attacks while ignoring cover it does the opposite of supporting grid combat because Alice & Bob get to have opt out veto power over it.
 

Levistus's_Leviathan

5e Freelancer
So a few thoughts.

First, I think the use of the DMG for optional rules is the best use possible. It is supposed to fire the imagination. For those who choose to engage with it, the book is supposed to give you ideas and options. Not all of them are going to things a DM is going to want for their table, but some of them will be the seeds for how a table is going to adjust the game to make it play the way they want. It's fully in keeping with the character and the history of D&D that a primary purpose of this rulebook is to remind you that the table, not the book, is in charge of the rules.

That said, I think the flanking (and other miniature rules) are both a decent start but also under-developed. I'd prefer that the DMG, instead of having it either more developed or less developed, instead have a description of the differences between grid/minis/TOTM play, and have more advanced mini play as a separate supplement. Flanking is good if you like minis, but people that are really into the combat modifiers and minis are going to want a lot more.

What I think might be interesting is having a more built-out and "themed section" with grouped-together optional rules ... as if they were various levers. For example, if you want to ratchet up the resource management and grittiness, there's a bunch of different optional rules ... why not have them together in one section, as different aspects? Or if you prefer a more narrative approach (or more player control over fiction) have those ideas together?
Having groups of different optional feats categorized by "theme" would be cool. Ravenloft has a group of setting-specific rules (Survivors, Stress, cosmetic spell changes, etc) that could replace the Horror and Insanity optional rules from the DMG. They could do similar things for the Gritty/Survival, Nonlethal, Tactical, and other types of play in the game, probably even calling out settings and campaign ideas where they'd work best (Horror for Ravenloft, Gritty for Dark Sun, Nonlethal for the Feywild, Tactical for Dragonlance, etc). Good idea!
 

overgeeked

B/X Known World
Resting. The default is nonsense but gritty realism is almost as bad. Something that splits the difference would be good.

Skill variants. They should be combined to one solid skill variant. You’re proficient in the ability scores you get save profs in from your class, and get prof bonus to any skill that’s directly related to your background and race, and anything directly related to your personality traits.

Morale shouldn’t be tied to WIS. It should be a standalone score so you can have fanatically devoted and driven monsters that have a low WIS. It shouldn’t be an optional rule.
 



overgeeked

B/X Known World
To add to mine, I agree with earlier posters who said injuries.

Characters should get injuries from critical hits, dropping to zero hp, and attacks taken while at zero hp.

Make them actually interesting and long lasting. You could steal WFRP's critical hit tables, especially some of the expanded charts, and they'd be about right.
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top