Some random house rules for things that bothered me

[Gwarok]

Some things that bothered me and what I've done or proposed, there are more, but here is what I felt like mentioning here today:

Things that bug me

1) Giant creatures hit really not much harder than medium ones. Big things should be REALLY scary to fight in close combat for man sized stuff, even if you are the greatest fighter in the land encased in the best armor, a T-Rex is not a laughing matter. Jaime Lannister in his prime with that Valerian sword would still find some excuse to not slug it out with one of those Frost Giants. Really just a level of suspension of disbelief I've never been able to make peace with.

2) Magic items that are rated "Very Rare" or thereabouts yet seem vastly inferior to lower quality or lower rated items. Specifically in this case comparing Staves of Fire or Frost to a Staff of Power, all of which are Very Rare but miles apart in usefulness. Also, the fact staves seem to just be weapons for specific purpose instead of a general tool to help wizards to their thing.

3 Speaking of magic swords, always bothered me that simply giving a +1 to a sword now made it magical and it can cut ghosts. Didn't seem like there was any way to give someone a weapon improvement that simply meant it was a sharper, stronger, better made weapon without also giving it super powers. What is the difference between a sword made by a master smith and one made by a merely competent one? And no one that can't fling fireballs or make miracles happen can make a decent sword? I'm pretty sure Hattori Hanzo never cracked a spellbook or studied at Hogwarts. This also never sat right with me.

Solutions:

1) I know the damage die goes up one with the size increase, but that doesn't really seem to capture the essence of how much harder big things hit. So the damage bonus from STR goes up with size as well. Ogre with a 19 Strength doesn't get the same +4 to damage a human does, it gets +8. STR 19 on Huge will get you +12. This will really make players not want to get hit by big things and come up with a better plan for fighting them than yonder orc warlord. We seem to have no problem with their carrying capacity going up with size, seems to me this isn't much different.

2) So I could just make Staves of Fire Rare instead of Very Rare, and I have. Now I also have "Greater" Staves of Fire/Frost. They come with plus +1(Very Rare) or +2(Legendary) varieties. In addition to what the normal staves do, their bonus applies to when they are used as quarterstaves, and also add 1(2) to the hit, DC, and effective level of any fire for frost spell cast through them or generated by the staff directly.

3) For weapons the +1-3 simply refers to the quality of the weapon. A non spellcaster can craft them, they just take longer and require more skill and better tools/materials. Which is why most of the +2 and +3 are made by elves and dwarves, they simply take too long to make for shorter lived races. Who's got the patience and time to spend 1 year to make a single sword, even a really kickass one? Elves and dwarves, that's who. And the occasional human grand master forging his magnum opus. But how does that help me fight werewolves and devils and ghosts you ask? It doesn't. You want to hit them your going to need a Magic Sword, and you'll know it's magic because it's on fire. Or glowing with the holy radiance of Celestia. Or made of silver. Yea, that's right, werewolves are still a thing now at 10th level, even though any sane DM would have given players a +1 something by then, totally making the need for silver weapons of any kind obsolete. So now you still get to have those resistances mean something past 4th level without running an absurdly magic weapon free campaign world just to shoe horn that sweet little piece of flavor in. I like the fact you need specific weapons for that, it's cool, it's classic fantasy, and almost totally absent from 5E campaigns.

Ok, that's all for now. I'm not totally invested in any of these ideas so anyone wanting to yell at me about how stupid and game breaking they are hoping I'll into launch a 10 page diatribe in defense of them is going to be sorely disappointed. I just think things work better this way, but you do you

 

[Gadget]

3 Speaking of magic swords, always bothered me that simply giving a +1 to a sword now made it magical and it can cut ghosts. Didn't seem like there was any way to give someone a weapon improvement that simply meant it was a sharper, stronger, better made weapon without also giving it super powers. What is the difference between a sword made by a master smith and one made by a merely competent one? And no one that can't fling fireballs or make miracles happen can make a decent sword? I'm pretty sure Hattori Hanzo never cracked a spellbook or studied at Hogwarts. This also never sat right with me.

I think this has been a level of detail that D&D has largely stayed away from; the pluses have always been used to differentiate various level of magical power in a simplified format. There has not been much effort to make discrete levels of "mundane" sword-smithing, though 3e did have 'masterwork' quality weapons that added some bonus without being magical. I like what you have done and considered something similar, but I rather just get rid (or curtail even more) the plus bonus and just designate "magic" by some other quality or ability.

 

[pming]

Some things that bothered me and what I've done or proposed, there are more, but here is what I felt like mentioning here today:

Things that bug me

1) Giant creatures hit really not much harder than medium ones.

I'd add a new "stat" for Size. The ratings for Str don't make any sense in 5e to begin with as you can have a 7' tall mass of meat and muscles with a 10 Str and you can have a 3' tall lean mean fighting machine halfling with a 20 Str. So I pretty much ignore S/D/C/I/W/C ratings as indications of what a creature looks like in 5e. Anyway, I'd add "Size Adjustment" as a new rating for anything below Small or above Large. I'd probably make it a DC roll, and success would indicate a DR to anything non-magic. In my campaigns, magic is powerful not because it can do just about anything, but because it is MAGIC so it doesn't play by the same rules as an arrow or sword. I'd start with a DC 15 for T or H, DC 10 for G. Success indicates they take minimum damage from non-magic attacks.

I'd also use the Knockback rules in the DMG (I think that's where I saw them...makes sense there). Might increase the chances based on the attacker v defenders Weight difference. If you are normal dude and you get backhanded by a 9-ton giant...you're going airborn.

2) Magic items that are rated "Very Rare" or thereabouts yet seem vastly inferior to lower quality or lower rated items.

Just because something isn't as powerful/useful as another doesn't indicate how rare it should be. I understand where you are coming from though, as we are talking about "mechanical effects in D&D", essentially. What I've done is...well, nothing. I learned decades ago to not give out all the juicy magic items that an adventure or whatever calls for. Exceptions are potions and scrolls. I don't "give out" magic items, as I roll for them based on the monsters treasure type as per 1e/Hackmaster4th. The "if you defeat CR 5 encounter...you get these amounts of magic, coins and gems" just sits wrongly with me. So...I pretty much use the Treasure Types in 1e/HM where they get a percentage chance for X amount of whatever (coins, gems, potions, etc).

One rule I've always lived by since figuring it out back in the mid-80's: It's easier to give, than to take away.

3 Speaking of magic swords, always bothered me that simply giving a +1 to a sword now made it magical and it can cut ghosts.

Easiest way to do this is to just assign some flat chance an item with a "+" is magic or not. Say a flat DC roll...10, 15, 20, whatever you feel is best for your campaign (use it consistently! Don't vary it once you have the DC you want). Then when a "magic sword +2" is indicated, roll. If you get equal or above whatever DC you set for your campaign, then it is indeed a magic sword +2. Otherwise it's just a sword. Or a "master work sword, +2, non-magical". Its +2 th/dmg, but can't cut ghosts. It's non-magical. That's what I'd do for 5e.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

Giant creatures hit really not much harder than medium ones.

That's because how hard it hits has nothing dto do with size - it's determined by the Challenge Rating.

Making an Ogre hit harder is fine, it just makes it a higher CR monster.

Magic items that are rated "Very Rare" or thereabouts yet seem vastly inferior to lower quality or lower rated items.

Yep, item rarity certainly is wonky. Do a web search for "sane magic item prices". There are at least a couple of documents repricing items.

Didn't seem like there was any way to give someone a weapon improvement that simply meant it was a sharper, stronger, better made weapon without also giving it super powers.

Yes, there is. "OK, you loot the monster's sword. It has +1 Attack Bonus and +1 Damage, but it isn't magical - it's just an extremely high quality item."

You could also throw in minor advantages like a basket hilt (advantage on rolls to resist being disarmed) or nasty hooks (advantage on Intimidation attempts).

There is an EN5ider article on minor weapon properties, a lot of which don't necessarily require magic.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

I've always felt that, if a legendary swordsmith crafts a masterwork katana, then it should be considered sharp enough that it can cut a ghost. The bonus to hit and damage is just a numerically expression of its sharpness, after all.

As for large creatures not hitting hard enough, I kind of agree, but I find small creatures to be a worse offender here. When a goblin hits as hard as a gnoll does, in spite of a six-point Strength differential, you know that something has gone seriously wrong.

 

[RogueHalfling]

I like the doubling the str bonus idea. It makes some sense, is simple to implement, and has some history in the game.

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

When a goblin hits as hard as a gnoll does, in spite of a six-point Strength differential, you know that something has gone seriously wrong.

The goblin is using a finesse weapon.

 

[Bacon Bits]

I think this has been a level of detail that D&D has largely stayed away from; the pluses have always been used to differentiate various level of magical power in a simplified format. There has not been much effort to make discrete levels of "mundane" sword-smithing, though 3e did have 'masterwork' quality weapons that added some bonus without being magical. I like what you have done and considered something similar, but I rather just get rid (or curtail even more) the plus bonus and just designate "magic" by some other quality or ability.

I think the issue is that "magical" is actually a real and significant bonus in 5e, even "+0 magical." Many of the higher level creatures resist or are immune to weapon damage... unless the weapon is magical. That means that for most campaigns, high level creatures have no special resistance to the attacks of martial characters. AC doesn't scale with level anymore; that's why a CR 3 Knight and a CR 16 Marilith both have AC 18. Yet some of the same creatures just have magical resistance that there's no way past. The difference between fighting a Balor as a Fighter and fighting a Balor as a Wizard is tremendous. Dragons can be largely the same. There are a lot of special magical defenses in the game that you just have to change tactics for, but the only special martial defense can be overcome by the weapon from the treasure hoard you found 12 levels ago.

I mean, take a close look at the Marilith. The Fighter has to contend with this:

AC 18
189 hp
Resistance to bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing from nonmagical attacks (i.e., nothing)
Adds 5 to its AC against one melee attack that would hit it from an attacker she can see (this costs a reaction, but the Marilith gets a reaction every turn)

OK, AC 23 is better, but with a +1 weapon the end game attack bonus is still +12 before any class features. The Fighter with a bog standard +1 weapon has a 50% chance to hit through the parry, and they'll do full damage... and the parry only counts on one attack.

The Wizard has to deal with this:

189 hp
Saving Throws Str +9, Con +10, Wis +8, Cha +10
Resistance to cold, fire, lightning
Immune to poison
Truesight 120', telepathy 120', teleport 120'
The marilith has advantage on saving throws against spells and other magical effects.

Ok, so, Int is +4 but there basically are no Int saves beyond Maze... and that won't kill it. Dex is +5... but few dex saves do decent damage that isn't cold, fire, or lightning, essentially meaning that the marilith has improved evasion. So Will +8 is the bad save? It's highly unlikely a Wizard PCs will ever see a save DC higher than 19. And the Marilith has still gets advantage, so a 75% chance to make Will saves against the end game DC and that's the bad save?

And, yeah, mariliths hit like a truck... but they hit like a truck against anybody.

Fiends, elementals, golems, and dragons are kind of all like this. A Fighter with a basic magic weapon is one of the most terrifying things in the game. If that's intentional, then it's weird that they get magic weapons beginning around level 3.

I mean, yeah, "the game isn't balanced around magic items," but that doesn't mean the game doesn't intend for you to find them. Quite the opposite! The treasure rules tell you to give them out. Look at what the Wizard has to deal with. There's layers of defense there that encourages some hesitation. Not for Fighters. I mean, yes, the game needs to be accessible, but a) spellcasting classes need to be accessible, too, b) "everything martial" shouldn't be a button mashing strategy that's also the best possible strategy against most high CR creatures.

Like the Wizard needs the Fighters help here. What does the Fighter need the Wizard's help with? Utility magic and hordes of chaff?

 

[The Crimson Binome]

The goblin is using a finesse weapon.

I am aware, and yet the damage inflicted is proportional to the severity of the wound. Somehow, a puny goblin is able to inflict as grievous an injury with its shortsword as a gnoll twice its size (and eight times its mass) can inflict with its spear.

The game mechanics do a poor job of reflecting the inherent power of a much larger and stronger attacker. That's the issue at hand.

 

[Ancalagon]

I am aware, and yet the damage inflicted is proportional to the severity of the wound. Somehow, a puny goblin is able to inflict as grievous an injury with its shortsword as a gnoll twice its size (and eight times its mass) can inflict with its spear.

The game mechanics do a poor job of reflecting the inherent power of a much larger and stronger attacker. That's the issue at hand.

So dex shouldn't add to damage? That is what you are suggesting. And... well there are some advantages to that...