D&D 5E Spells you house rule?

SakanaSensei

Adventurer
Why then though?

Unless it's obvious there is a pass/fail situation at play, the in game PCs have no idea the puppet controlling them (the player) is about to make a 'skill check'.

A Barbarian about to advance to move a heavy thing I can see, or someone involved in a game of chance or skill. Ditto a Rogue about to disarm a located trap, or defusing a bomb type scenario.

Someone looking down a hallway isn't a trigger that warrants a Cleric knowing a 'skill check' is at play.

Generally unless the player states they're using it before I call for the check (and it's clear they have an in game prompt to do so, and to provide assistance to a challenge that the other PC is clearly facing) I dont allow it.
This is the “DM may I” problem I mentioned upthread, which makes me feel like a nofun curmudgeon. Players want to use the thing, which is why they try.

Think I might steal the “everybody gets a plus 1 until concentration shifts” take on the spell, seems like an elegant fix.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Question for those who changed Leomunds Tiny Hut to simply keeping out the elements:

What advantage does the spell offer over simply using a tent?
Fair question.

A tent that can provide comfortable shelter for about six people and gear is pretty big. It is likely made of oiled or waxed canvas- thus rather heavy. Probably close to fifty or sixty pounds. (Sixty pounds is the ideal maximum weight for backpackers or military. Although a full military kit is closer to a hundred ponds these days.)

Unlike a canvas tent, the spell keeps a relatively comfortable temperature without the need for ventilation flaps or charcoal stoves. It shelters from wind and can be a camouflaged color that changes as to environment. It keeps out vermin such as ticks or fleas. And, most importantly, it keeps you dry. Staying dry is vital for any prolonged trek through the wilderness.

So instead of hauling 60-80 pounds of survival gear (the tent, rain tarp, blankets, heater, &c.) You carry that much more treasure out. And it erects effectively immediately.

Also, being third level, it is an excellent choice between improving survival from the environment or fireball improving survival from foes. There is an opportunity cost there.
 

Stalker0

Legend
Here's my list:

  • Bless: +2 instead of +1d4 (mainly I just like the speed of bonuses over rolling more dice)
  • Counterspell: Banned
  • Cure Wounds: Now heals 1d8+ability mod for each spell level above 1st.
  • Healing Spirit: Remove concentration duration. Change to "As a reaction, heal one creature within 60 feet for 1d6".
  • Guidance: Duration is now 1 hour (concentration). Effect changed to: "6 people gain a +1 to all ability checks for the duration." (fire and forget, weaker bonus than base guidance but now works on everything. No debate on when to use it, no muss, no fuss).
  • Prayer of Healing: Change to "gain 60 points of healing, distributed as you wish to any people within range. For each level above second, the healing increases by 20" (now a strong and efficient out of combat healing spell).
  • Pass without Trace: Change to "creatures gain advantage on stealth checks, cannot be tracked, and suffer no penalties to stealth from armor or encumbrance" (I didn't like that druids had become super stealth ninjas)
  • Raise Dead/Ressurection - Banned
  • Revivify: Now 9th level
  • Tiny Hut: No longer bars people or things through the dome, can no longer be made opaque
 

This is the “DM may I” problem I mentioned upthread, which makes me feel like a nofun curmudgeon. Players want to use the thing, which is why they try.

Think I might steal the “everybody gets a plus 1 until concentration shifts” take on the spell, seems like an elegant fix.

No it's nothing of the sort. I just want the player to explain to me how what they're doing makes sense in the fiction. They're literally praying for guidance from a Deity for assistance in an imminent task, or performing a minor blessing to another person to assist them in a task. Accordingly, the (the character, not the player) kind of needs reasonable grounds to know (in advance) that there is an imminent task at hand, where the result is in doubt, and that requires that immediate assistance.

Example:

A party of PCs are advancing down a hallway, when the DM asks for a Perception check (to notice some Orcs down the hallway). The Cleric player interjects with 'I cast guidance first to grant a bonus to the check'.

My question is: How does that Cleric, in the game fiction, know they're about to make a Perception check in the first place? There is no indication to that in game Cleric that they face an imminent test to their skill. Accordingly, I would not allow it without some kind of reasonable justification.

If the Cleric told me 'Before I attempt to sneak past the Guard, I pray to my God for Guidance' then yeah sure, because that makes sense in the fiction.

If your only trigger to cast it is 'The DM asked me to make a check' sans any reasonable in game reason for your PC to know he was making a check where the results are in doubt, then there is no reason why your PC would just randomly cast the spell.
 
Last edited:

I have a few.
True strike still cost an action but can be cast with a range og 60 feet onto an other person.

Hex and Hunter mark no longer require concentration if you are single classes in the warlock or ranger class. This is a feature of both class. Multiclassing makes you lose the no concentration bonus.

All combat spells with concentration can be reapplied to a target that had failed its initial save. It now takes two saves in a row to break the spell (or you make the caster lose his concentration). It takes a bonus action to reassert the spells and it counts as a casting so it limits the caster to cantrip casting in the round of reassertion. Example: "Hold is cast by the cleric on a foe. The foe fails his save and is held. On the second round the foe saves and on the cleric's next turn, the cleric can try to reassert the Hold spell. The foe must save again. If the save is successful, the Hold spell ends. If the save is failed. The Hold spell function again. In both cases, the cleric can now only cast a cantrip with his action."

Witchbolt can now apply its subsequent rounds of damage as a bonus action. But doing so limit the caster to cantrip casting as a main action.

Nothing else has been changed so far.
 

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin
I forgot to mention earlier but a general rule change about concentration/save spells:

If a spell requires concentration and allows a save each round to end the effect (e.g. Hold Person):

1. If the caster continues to concentrate, the target does not get to reroll the failed save each round.
2. If the caster releases or loses concentration, then the target can make a save each round to end the effect.
 

jayoungr

Legend
Supporter
I've mentioned this before on the board, but I houserule shatter as follows:

If the area of shatter includes a stone or wooden wall, the spell causes bits of the wall to crumble and break off. All squares inside the area of the spell and adjacent to the wall become difficult terrain.

I just feel that it creates a little bit of an interesting tradeoff for a very popular spell.
 



G

Guest 7034872

Guest
I have just one and I consider it tiny: I make the water from Create or Destroy Water potable. Well, I guess there is one other, but my understanding is the official text will soon change to reflect this anyway, so I don't consider it a house rule: in Simulacrum I don't let simulacra create more simulacra.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top