D&D 5E Solving the 5MWD

[Maxperson]

If I was going that route I wouldn't

I think I would do two pools if I went that route. I think the spell pool should be separate from the one that controls the other three categories.

How many spells of each level would you say a 9th level wizard should be able to cast in each combat? The equivalent to 1 spell per spell level? More? Less?

 

[FrogReaver]

I think I would do two pools if I went that route. I think the spell pool should be separate from the one that controls the other three categories.

How many spells of each level would you say a 9th level wizard should be able to cast in each combat? The equivalent to 1 spell per spell level? More? Less?

I'd say he would need the points to be able to cast 1 first, 1 second, 1 third and 1 fourth level spell per short rest (excluding arcane recovery). He could use his points in such a way to cast a fifth level spell but he would have to made some tradeoffs with the points I just listed

So maybe 16 points if you count the sorcerer's sorcery point costs per spell level

***Btw I was looking at it per short rest. Probably would half that per combat. Should be about 2 combats per short rest, though sometimes 1 and sometimes more.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I do want to give 5e some credit on this front. Concentration limits the amount of power a caster can bring to bear in a single combat.

It limits buff-layering... to the number of casters in the party. But, it doesn't limit spells/encounter, you can still cast a non-concentration spell while concentrating (unlike 1e, when concentration was required to cast any spell, or 4e when sustain required an action).

Their concentration spells are really good over the top combat options.

And, if you have surfeit of slots as in the 5MWD, you can afford to start a concentration spell back up again if it is broken.

Personally if I wanted to convert spells to short rest recharge I would use spell point variant and then take 1/2 or 1/3 or maybe somewhere inbetween of the spell points that variant gives them.

1/3 would give you the theoretical class & encounter balance of a 2-short rest/6-encounter day, 1/4, 3-rest (up to 8-encounter) - both are theoretically in the prescribed range, but spell points give added flexibility so the more restrictive option would make even more sense.
The obvious advantage is you'll have less rounding error when doing a simple implementation.

*Btw I was looking at it per short rest. Probably would half that per combat. Should be about 2 combats per short rest, th

If you were to go all the way and convert the theoretically-balancable 8-encounter/3-short-rest day to a strict encounter-based recharge you'd simply divide daily/long-rest ability uses by 8, and short rest by 2.

At that point you'd probably want to start rounding 0.5 up, and grouping slots together across levels to 'pay for' even one.
Soy you'd get your first slot at 4 daily slots, and your second at 12. I'd argue that second slot should be 3rd level rather than 1st or 2nd.

 

[Garthanos]

It limits buff-layering... to the number of casters in the party. But, it doesn't limit spells/encounter, you can still cast a non-concentration spell while concentrating (unlike 1e, when concentration was required to cast any spell, or 4e when sustain required an action).

Action sustains I like a lot they are highly tweakable. Does this require a minor action or an standard or a move for instance. And yes one can prevent those various things via many abilities not just an oh you take damage much more tactically interesting

 

[Tony Vargas]

Action sustains I like a lot they are highly tweakable. Does this require a minor action or an standard or a move for instance. And yes one can prevent those various things via many abilities not just an oh you take damage much more tactically interesting

Yeah, in 5e they'd be a bit trickier, move isn't really an action, it's not convertible, just your ability to move. So sustains'd've had to've been either bonus (cantrips only while sustaining, which is pretty reasonable) or full actions (basically the same result as concentrating in 1e) - the up side'd be that there's no save required,as long as you can take the action you can sustain.

 

[Garthanos]

Yeah, in 5e they'd be a bit trickier, move isn't really an action

Must move N feet (in some restricted fashion) or Reduce your maximum move distance N feet, done

 

[Garthanos]

The dance moves to sustain this magic require you spend 25 feet worth of movement...

 

[Garthanos]

If you remain in the square with the enemy you used the martial throw on the enemy remains prone and unable to move

 

[Sadras]

I still wonder hy you chose a penalty of exhaustion and placed weapped it in uncertainty. I don't understand why the need or benefit to rolling dice to determine if you are exhausted? Why wasn't this an always occurring detriment?

I remember during that time on Enworld there were some who had suggested tying recharges to exhaustion but none had, if I can recollect correctly, formulated an actual system.
If one were to change the system and have exhaustion kick in automatically
(1) How many short rests ability recharges would you allow before one received suffered a level of exhaustion?
(2) How many long rest ability recharges would you allow before one suffered from x levels of exhaustion?
(3) Would the above system apply to all levels?

I find the above questions tricky to answer - and ones which thankfully I do not need to thanks to the system of rolling or uncertainty if you wish. The uncertainty for me is a feature.
Should you be able to comfortably answer questions 1-3 then it is all good. Change it up for your table. It is a win.

I have some major criticisms of the other rules. 3 levels of exhaustion - having a decent chance to occur your 2nd day on the road is pretty harsh.

A few things.
Yes it is.
You have Advantage on your first roll.
Overland should be treacherous.
One Travel Rest removes 1 level of exhaustion, one Long Rest removes all levels of exhaustion. Exhaustion is not the end of the world
As you rise in levels the +4, becomes a +6, becomes a +8...etc, so the danger starts to seep away. What I'm saying is the risk is very dependent on which levels you usually play. If your table plays levels 1-7 predominantly then make changes to suit the risk you find appropriate.
You can change the 3 levels penalty to 2 levels or even 1.
You could have a sliding scale, fail by 5 or more you suffer x levels of exhaustion.
You can lower the DC.
Instead of giving Advantage every Long Rest, you can give Advantage for Travel Rests.

Anyways, more importantly in relation to the 5MWD. It doesn't actually solve it - though it is a lot more flexible around it than the current D&D default system. It still is going to have certain fictional settings it works well with and others that it doesn't

Which ones doesn't it work well for?

The system as listed in the pdf doesn't allow for an adventure where you are within a relatively short journey to a long rest site.

Apologies I'm not sure I'm understanding this sentence well, but I will try answer it.
Short journey adventure should (I assume) not require any recoveries. Once at long rest site - one would need a full 24 hours of rest before refreshing, that is not always possible, so you can likely cram 6-8 encounters between the short journey and the long rest site. Should the team not be able to rest, they recharge their abilities

Long Rest abilities the DC 10 + number of days travelled with Advantage. Worst case PC gains 3 levels, but has all their superspells/powers back and blows through the remaining encounters.
Short Rest abilities can easily be recharged daily as the DC starts much lower.

If PCs blow their load every encounter this system will teach them to curb that and plan accordingly depending on the expected travel time. I find with this system PCs actually look at the map, measure distances, work out travel time, determine if they should hustle, evaluate encounters based on resource management, plan sleepovers in the various settlements they pass so that they minimise risk (keeping DC low) during travel. If that level of strategy doesn't appeal to your table then sure, this might not be the system for you.

 

[Harzel]

That definitely makes it easier, but isn't a solve all when balancing the conversion. It's a good idea, though.

What would you do for the long rest racial/class abilities that Tony wants to chuck out of the window?

1/2 of the barbarian is raging and the other 1/2 isn't. @lowkey13 will build you a d100 table of body parts so you can roll to see which 1/2 is which. (Roll on the table repeatedly until you have accumulated approximately 1/2 of a barbarian.)