D&D 5E Ten House Rules for More Dynamic 5E Combat

[el-remmen]

So today I posted an article as part of the Rules Lab feature of the HOW-I-RUN-IT.com site explaining 10 rules I use at my table that help foster dynamic and engaging tactical D&D combat. While the house rules suggestions are mostly geared to play with minis/markers and a grid, I am equally comfortable running TotM style games/combat and use all the same rules when running that way as well. I also know these are not to everyone's style, but at the very least I hope there will be something here that you'll find useful.

Rules Lab: Ten House Rules for More Dynamic 5E Combat

Lively and interesting combat in 5E.

how-i-run-it.com

The list of 10 rules we use is:

1. Ad Hoc Advantage/Disadvantage.
2. Everyone is an Ambusher.
3. Flanking.
4. Allies, Cover, & Ranged Combat.
5. Death Saves Revived.
6. Hero Points.
7. Ready & Delay.
8. Squeezing.
9. Diagonal Movement (& Measuring Sticks)
10. Minions.

As I mention in the article, while my group uses all of these (and more), I don't necessarily recommend adopting all of them even if you like them all (which, lets be honest, I doubt anyone will like them all) but think it is better to start with #1 to get a feel for it and then introduce 1 or 2 at a time as applicable.

You'll have to read the article for the details of how I run it, but the short version for each is as follows:

1. Ad Hoc Advantage/Disadvantage - apply/declare Dis/Advantage based on the detailed circumstances of the combat
2. Everyone is an Ambusher - everyone gains Advantage against surprised opponents
3. Flanking - just like the DMG option suggests
4. Allies, Cover, & Ranged Combat - make shooting into melee potentially perilous forcing more careful positioning
5. Death Saves Revived - The Dying condition doesn't necessarily make you unconscious
6. Hero Points - mini-inspiration dice everyone gets to accomplish crucial things
7. Ready & Delay - stolen from 3E to have a more dynamic initiative that can change.
8. Squeezing - sometimes it is okay for more than one character to occupy the same space (though there are penalties)
9. Diagonal Movement (& Measuring Sticks) - make sure you count diagonal movement differently than horizontal/vertical movement
10. Minions - not quite the 4E version, but simple rules for cutting through lots of mooks and simulating each of them having a different hit point total.

Anyway, I am sure people will have opinions and I am happy to hear them and to answer questions either on the site or on here. But to be clear, I have been using these rules and approaches for years over various editions to great effect, but they work best with a operational philosophy when running combat that a) builds encounters with terrain and setting in mind, b) run enemies with motives and strategies that fit them (not necessarily "optimal" ones), c) model the kind of combat activities you want players to try with their enemies.

 

[Weiley31]

I do sorta Ad-Hoc Adv/Dis during my 5E games. Most of the time I'll look at a situation that has happened and if it makes sense to me, then Advantage/Disadvantage is applied and what not.

 

[Mad_Jack]

I've always implemented the first three into my games in some form, as well as having some variation on minions, although what each of them looked like has varied with the rules of the edition I was playing at the time.

Re: #2 - Ever since 1st Ed. I've been extremely generous with letting thieves/rogues apply their sneak attack and in ruling whether or not they can hide (or retain the hidden condition) based on the individual circumstances rather than the specific rules - character's attacking with surprise should get advantage to their roles, and rather than someone losing the hidden condition as soon as they leave their cover, they don't lose it until they break one of the other conditions of remaining hidden (usually wandering into the direct line of sight of a person facing you)... If your stealth roll beats the passive perception of a person who's not looking in your direction, or the active perception roll of a guard or other person who can be assumed to be actively alert, you can sneak up on them or past them even if you lack actual cover.
I'm perfectly happy with the idea that somebody with a knife can sneak up on a fully-armored guard and take them down before the guard can act - make your roll to sneak up on them and I'll give you a surprise round with advantage, and then your regular turn with advantage.

 

[Zaukrie]

Diaganol movement? We are talking tiny differences here, so I think I used the old 4e system? The first one is two, the next is one? I don't know what I do....that's funny. But, really, it just isn't a big deal to me.

I haven't read it yet, but a lot of those are things I do.

 

[LordEntrails]

1. Ad Hoc Advantage/Disadvantage.

Nothing wrong with this. If my party had trouble getting advantage frequently, I would look at this more. Next campaign I will be looking at applying more ad-hoc disadvantage.

1. Everyone is an Ambusher.

Personally I don't like this one. It minimizes the characters who do have the feat. Last night the whole party spent resources and turns setting up the NPCs just so the assassin rogue could sneak up behind them and assassinate them.

1. Flanking.

Always depnds on the group. Depends on how tactical they want to be and if gaining advantage is an issue. IMO, advantage should be something like 30% common, whatever that means.

1. Allies, Cover, & Ranged Combat.

This was such a hassle in 3.5 I'm very leary about reinstating it. I like fast and smooth combat in 5E. Gives more time for story and socializing than worrying about mechanics.

1. Hero Points.

Instead we allow multiple inspiration slots per character. And at the end of each session (2 hours) the players vote to give one character inspiration. So inspiration on average gets used once every 2 hours.

1. Ready & Delay.

Not a fan. Too fiddle and slows down combat. BUT, what we do is reroll init every round. I think it achieves some of the same goals, without slowing us down.

1. Diagonal Movement (& Measuring Sticks)

Absolutely. IMO this should not be an optional rule for anyone with competent geometry skills.

 

[Shiroiken]

So today I posted an article as part of the Rules Lab feature of the HOW-I-RUN-IT.com site explaining 10 rules I use at my table that help foster dynamic and engaging tactical D&D combat. While the house rules suggestions are mostly geared to play with minis/markers and a grid, I am equally comfortable running TotM style games/combat and use all the same rules when running that way as well. I also know these are not to everyone's style, but at the very least I hope there will be something here that you'll find useful.

Rules Lab: Ten House Rules for More Dynamic 5E Combat

Lively and interesting combat in 5E.

how-i-run-it.com

The list of 10 rules we use is:

1. Ad Hoc Advantage/Disadvantage.
2. Everyone is an Ambusher.
3. Flanking.
4. Allies, Cover, & Ranged Combat.
5. Death Saves Revived.
6. Hero Points.
7. Ready & Delay.
8. Squeezing.
9. Diagonal Movement (& Measuring Sticks)
10. Minions.

As I mention in the article, while my group uses all of these (and more), I don't necessarily recommend adopting all of them even if you like them all (which, lets be honest, I doubt anyone will like them all) but think it is better to start with #1 to get a feel for it and then introduce 1 or 2 at a time as applicable.

You'll have to read the article for the details of how I run it, but the short version for each is as follows:

1. Ad Hoc Advantage/Disadvantage - apply/declare Dis/Advantage based on the detailed circumstances of the combat
2. Everyone is an Ambusher - everyone gains Advantage against surprised opponents
3. Flanking - just like the DMG option suggests
4. Allies, Cover, & Ranged Combat - make shooting into melee potentially perilous forcing more careful positioning
5. Death Saves Revived - The Dying condition doesn't necessarily make you unconscious
6. Hero Points - mini-inspiration dice everyone gets to accomplice crucial things
7. Ready & Delay - stolen from 3E to have a more dynamic and change initiative
8. Squeezing - sometimes it is okay for more than one character to occupy the same space (though there are penalties)
9. Diagonal Movement (& Measuring Sticks) - make sure you count diagonal movement differently than horizontal/vertical movement
10. Minions - not quite the 4E version, but simple rules for cutting through lots of mooks and simulating each of them having a different hit point total.

Anyway, I am sure people will have opinions and I am happy to hear them and to answer questions either on the site or on here. But to be clear, I have been using these rules and approaches for years over various editions to great effect, but they work best with a operational philosophy when running combat that a) builds encounters with terrain and setting in mind, b) run enemies with motives and strategies that fit them (not necessarily "optimal" ones, c) model the kind of combat activities you want players to try with their enemies.

Overall I like the concepts, but I still disagree with Flanking. Rather than creating a dynamic combat, it always creates a static combat, where people form a conga line to always have advantage. Are the hero points (#5) and minions (#10) the same as the options in the DMG (although minions are called cleave iirc)?

 

[Zaukrie]

I really like MCDM's take on minions. I have a draft PDF for minions and leaders (I changed it to leaders and lackeys), but I have never published that one. Needs a lot of clean up, and likely playtesting (which, let's be real, I never do for my products outside my group).

 

[Charlaquin]

I don’t think ad hoc advantage and disadvantage is a house rule. Giving circumstantial advantage and disadvantage more often is definitely good advice for encouraging more dynamic combat, but it’s well within the purview of RAW.

 

[Charlaquin]

Overall I like the concepts, but I still disagree with Flanking. Rather than creating a dynamic combat, it always creates a static combat, where people form a conga line to always have advantage. Are the hero points (#5) and minions (#10) the same as the options in the DMG (although minions are called cleave iirc)?

Yeah it’s also directly in conflict with ad hoc advantage and disadvantage, since having such an easy source of advantage eliminates the need to try and gain it through improvised actions.

 

[darjr]

Move those monsters.

They are not going to live long anyway. Move them and take the OPs, what are you saving HP for anyway?

 

[Gadget]

Seems interesting. I'm not a fan of of the DMG flanking rule that grants advantage. While it does promote a more tactical play style, it becomes too easy to get advantage and devalues other spells and abilities that grant it. I would think the ad hoc advantage/disadvantage rule would be sufficient for some circumstances that warrant it.

 

[Charlaquin]

Allies, cover, and ranged combat is a strange one. I think the author maybe doesn’t realize that creatures (including allies) are already sources of half cover by RAW in 5e, and/or that half cover increases a target’s effective AC by 2. This accomplishes the same thing as their proposed house-rule in terms of making shooting into melee more difficult, without conflicting with ad-hoc advantage and disadvantage (which, again, I think is just best practice rather than a house rule).

 

[Charlaquin]

I do really like the death save house rule. I’ve messed around with giving PCs the ability to remain conscious at 0 HP at a penalty, but it has generally felt kinda off. This version is pretty interesting though, I might give it a try.

 

[Pedantic]

Yeah it’s also directly in conflict with ad hoc advantage and disadvantage, since having such an easy source of advantage eliminates the need to try and gain it through improvised actions.

This is a general problem with 5e not having enough levers to provide bonuses outside of advantage. A5E's modified take on expertise (which is what you get for flanking) is a good adjustment. You get a +1d4 to your roll, and if multiple sources of expertise would stack (this actually isn't the case in A5e, but say something like the Bless spell), the die increases in size to +1d6 instead, up to +1d8, with a few special mechanics letting you break the limit up to +1d12.

 

[Charlaquin]

This is a general problem with 5e not having enough levers to provide bonuses outside of advantage.

5e does actually have non-advantage bonuses and penalties, they’re just used very sparingly. Cover, for example, grants +2 AC for half or +5 AC for 3/4. Bless/Bane grant +/- 1d4. So, the tools exist within 5e’s framework, they’re just under-utilized so a lot of DMs don’t consider them (when they even remember they exist). I like advantage and disadvantage a lot as the catch-all circumstantial bonus/penalty, but when using house-rules like these, I think it’s important not to have them all use that same mechanic.

A5E's modified take on expertise (which is what you get for flanking) is a good adjustment. You get a +1d4 to your roll, and if multiple sources of expertise would stack (this actually isn't the case in A5e, but say something like the Bless spell), the die increases in size to +1d6 instead, up to +1d8, with a few special mechanics letting you break the limit up to +1d12.

That’s pretty neat.

 

[Bloodstone Press]

I use ad hoc bonuses and penalties, but I usually keep them to +2/-2. Advantage/disadvantage is equivalent to +5/-5. So I reserve that for more significant situations.

Shooting into combat is a thing that bugs me in 5e.

 

[toucanbuzz]

Allies, Cover, & Ranged Combat - make shooting into melee potentially perilous forcing more careful positioning

Shooting into combat is a thing that bugs me in 5e.

Bugs me too. Ranged attackers already have it good and prior editions penalized trying to fire into melee.

Disadvantage is an easy-to-remember house rule if there's an ally in between. Otherwise, I'd think if grappling, it'd be fair that you've got a 50/50 chance of the attack roll being applied against your chosen target.

 

[Blue]

I like your list, but we tried flanking in two separate games and dropped it in both. It made advantage too easy to get, which minimized trying to get it other ways, and trivialized class features that granted it. "Look, a Samurai can do it for three whole rounds a day!" Also because melee-focused foes often outnumbered front lines, it meant that there was advantage against PCs most of the time, making striving for high AC less useful, and causing more swingy combats due to more crits against PCs. There were other, smaller issues as well such as penalizing the character with the higher initiative who gets their first and such.

If flanking switched to a bonus, say a flat +2 or +1d4, it would get rid of half of those issues.

 

[Charlaquin]

I use ad hoc bonuses and penalties, but I usually keep them to +2/-2. Advantage/disadvantage is equivalent to +5/-5. So I reserve that for more significant situations.

It’s only equivalent to +5/-5 when you need a 10 or 11 on the d20 to succeed. The further from a 50/50 chance you have, the smaller the impact of advantage/disadvantage. If you need an 8 on the die (which is more typical for attacks with 5e’s math) it’s equivalent to +4.5. Which is still significant, but my point is that the effect of advantage and disadvantage is much more complex than “about +5.” A more useful heuristic is that advantage and disadvantage reduce swing. If you already had a really good or really bad chance of hitting, advantage or disadvantage won’t change that much. If you had a 50/50 shot, advantage or disadvantage will make a significant difference.

Shooting into combat is a thing that bugs me in 5e.

Not a fan of the rules for cover?

 

[Charlaquin]

Bugs me too. Ranged attackers already have it good and prior editions penalized trying to fire into melee.

So does 5e, since creatures (including allied creatures) are sources of cover. Unless you have Sharpshooter, you need a good angle or your allies will grant your enemies half cover, which increases their effective AC against you by 2.

Disadvantage is an easy-to-remember house rule if there's an ally in between. Otherwise, I'd think if grappling, it'd be fair that you've got a 50/50 chance of the attack roll being applied against your chosen target.

I just use the Hitting Cover optional rule from the DMG. If you miss a shot that would have hit if the target’s AC if they didn’t have cover, you hit the source of cover. Which basically means you’ve got a 10% chance of hitting your allies when shooting into melee without a clear angle.