log in or register to remove this ad

 

D&D 5E Thread closed, please delete

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
THREAD CLOSED.

Sorry, wanted to discuss a selection of house rules, and explicitly NOT changing the rest structure. Understood what the rest structure changes would do but that was not the point of the discussion.

Instead, multiple people hijacked the post to talk about rest structure, one with repeated messages even after being told it was not part of this discussion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

log in or register to remove this ad

6ENow!

The Game Is Over
First, love the disclaimer! ;)

Second, I think this will help accomplish your goal. By doubling damage you are, in essence, doing the same we do by half HP (more or less), which will make the game more lethal in many ways. The extra HP at lower levels via CON score will help mitigate this, since 5E is most lethal at lower levels as is.

As for the per encounter recovery of features, I've been considering the same thing myself, but I would decrease the uses proportionally so it is a benefit still, but not as much. I do think this will help with making monks (especially) more appealing.

Finally, I am all for granting more spell slots. Our spell point system allows for more casting in general and reduces the reliance on cantrips in combat, which I find annoying personally.

One thing I will suggest is another idea I've considered (you might or might not like it) is to replenish HP per encounter automatically. With this, we are adding a wounding system which does not replenish automatically, but it has been my observation that HP attrition is a bad model since 90% of the time or more, the PCs enter each new battle with full (or near full) HP anyway... So, you are really just reducing other things that are used to restore those lost HP. Hopefully, that makes sense.
 

Quartz

Adventurer
For spellcasters, check out this thread, and in particular this post.

For Fighters, consider the following changes: Action Surge lasts a number of rounds equal to your Proficiency Bonus. Gain Indomitable at 4th level or 5th level and make it auto-succeed (q.v Legendary Resistance). Drop the additional feats at levels 6 and 14 and grant an additional Reaction or Bonus Action at each of those levels.
 

el-remmen

Moderator Emeritus
I run 1 to 3 encounters for my core books only 5E game, with no real house rules to speak of (we use a weaker variant of the hero point option) and the PCs struggle regularly. So don't have any advice or suggestions - just curious about problems I haven't encountered.

(To be Honest, I am guessing about how many encounters per day, because in my style of play, the scenario determines encounters per day, not an abstract rule.
 

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
I run 1 to 3 encounters for my core books only 5E game, with no real house rules to speak of (we use a weaker variant of the hero point option) and the PCs struggle regularly. So don't have any advice or suggestions - just curious about problems I haven't encountered.

(To be Honest, I am guessing about how many encounters per day, because in my style of play, the scenario determines encounters per day, not an abstract rule.
This problem is something we've noticed after running multiple campaigns - we end up playing mostly a subset of classes: casters and hybrids like paladin and barbarians. The current fighter we have says he doesn't feel like he keeps up. We just had a discussion about that tonight.
 
Last edited:


This problem is something we've noticed after running multiple campaigns - we end up playing mostly a subset of classes: casters and hybrids like paladin and barbarians. The current fighter we have says he doesn't feel like he keeps up. We just had a discussion about that tonight.

Its because your DM isnt policing the adventuring 'day' (not necessarily a day).

It seems like you've identified the cause (we only ever get 1-3 encounters per long rest, and never short rest) and the natural consequence of that meta (Barbarians, Paladins and full casters everywhere, while Fighters, Warlocks and Monks suck).

The natural solution is for the rest meta to change. That decision alone will alter your game drastically.

You could just impose Gritty realism resting (overnights are Short rests, and Long rests are week long affairs back home), but that's possibly too drastic an option. Instead, as DM of this game I would police the adventuring day and do the following:
  • No automatic long rests at the end of the session (should you be doing that).
  • Players are to record resource use (slots, rages, HP loss, HD used etc) on a sheet of paper (see below), and hand those sheets over to the DM at the end of the session (for occasional auditing, or simply just the fear of such an audit).
  • -You get a long rest after 8 hours of uninterrupted rest, and when the DM decides it's an appropriate time for such a rest to replenish resources. Not all Long rests are equal. As a general rule, players can expect long rests not to do anything until they've dealt with around 6 encounters since their last one.
  • Short rests are now only a few minutes long (quick map check, swig of water, binding wounds, taking a knee etc) but limited to 2 per long rest (max). Take them whenever you want outside of combat.
That pretty much does it.

----------------------------------
For resource sheets they look something like a sheet of paper with every single long rest/ short rest resource on it, separated by long and short rest (and HP and HD) with check boxes next to them.

For a Paladin 3/ Sorcerer 3/ Hexblade 3/ BM Fighter 3 (to use a complex example), such a sheet would look something like this:

Health:
Current HP: XXX of YYY
HD used (D6): OOO
HD used (D8): OOO
HD used (D10): OOOOOO

Long rest:
LoH: OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO
Slots (1st): OOOO
Slots (2nd): OOO
SP: OOO

Short rest: OO
Channel divinity: O
Warlock slots (2nd): OO
Hexblades curse: O
Action surge: O
Second Wind (d10+3): O
Superiority dice: OOOO
-------------------------------------------------------

As Players use such resources, the Player fills in one of the 'O's next to that ability in pencil. When the Player takes a short rest they fill in a Short Rest 'O' and erase all the filled in 'O's underneath it.

A long rest clears all the boxes (other than HD) and restores HP to full.
 

You can literally prepare those sheets on an A4 bit of paper for each PC (or get them to do so themselves).

Remind them at first to fill it in each time (its literally just coloring in or ticking off a small circle) and evilly suggest failure to fill in a box might even cause the PC a level of exhaustion in addition to losing the resource, because you obviously wore yourself out casting that spell/ action surging/ using a Sorcery point and forgetting to expend that resource in the process.

Once they're recording stuff they're supposed to be recording, and wake up to the fact you're serious about the 'At least 6 encounters between long rest recharges, unless I feel merciful... and I rarely do' rule, you're golden.
 

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
I am looking on feedback if these work within the given contract. Please don't suggest ways to change the context like the Gritty Rest option, that's not what this thread is about.

Its because your DM isnt policing the adventuring 'day' (not necessarily a day).

It seems like you've identified the cause (we only ever get 1-3 encounters per long rest, and never short rest) and the natural consequence of that meta (Barbarians, Paladins and full casters everywhere, while Fighters, Warlocks and Monks suck).

The natural solution is for the rest meta to change. That decision alone will alter your game drastically.

You could just impose Gritty realism resting (overnights are Short rests, and Long rests are week long affairs back home),

Sorry, I am not looking at changing the context. Your ideas have merit but are out of scope for this discussion.
 
Last edited:

S'mon

Legend
It looks overall like a hideous mess to me - but if you and your players can keep track of all that in play, great I guess. But I did use "At 1st level, characters receive their CON score as additional HPs in addition to what their class grants" in my Primeval Thule campaign, and found it worked well especially in conjunction with that setting's higher baseline for monster & NPC Challenge & damage.
 

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
It looks overall like a hideous mess to me - but if you and your players can keep track of all that in play, great I guess. But I did use "At 1st level, characters receive their CON score as additional HPs in addition to what their class grants" in my Primeval Thule campaign, and found it worked well especially in conjunction with that setting's higher baseline for monster & NPC Challenge & damage.
Can you say what looks like a mess? Specifically, what's not a drop-in replacement and that is the same complexity as the current rules? Because that's a point I specifically aimed at - for the most part all you are doing is the exact same rules but writing down different numbers/die sizes. Warlock spells/druid wildshape is about the only places where I increased complexity.

Please give specific examples of increases in complexity or lack of clarity so I can correct them.
 

S'mon

Legend
Can you say what looks like a mess? Specifically, what's not a drop-in replacement and that is the same complexity as the current rules? Because that's a point I specifically aimed at - for the most part all you are doing is the exact same rules but writing down different numbers/die sizes. Warlock spells/druid wildshape is about the only places where I increased complexity.

Please give specific examples of increases in complexity or lack of clarity so I can correct them.

No, it's not one thing being bad, it's the aggregate of multiple changes. I find the more player-facing rules get changed, the unhappier players get, and the harder it is to keep track of every change.
 

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
No, it's not one thing being bad, it's the aggregate of multiple changes. I find the more player-facing rules get changed, the unhappier players get, and the harder it is to keep track of every change.
Got it - if these were the core rules they would be fine, but having multiple points of change that the players have to track when they are used to the rules in the book gets confusing.
 

Sorry, I am not looking at changing the context. Your ideas have merit but are out of scope for this discussion.

It looks like you want to make changes to every single class, when all you have to do is change the rest frequency.

Doesnt that make a heck of a lot more sense though?
 

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
It looks like you want to make changes to every single class, when all you have to do is change the rest frequency.

Doesnt that make a heck of a lot more sense though?
It doesn't meet the stated goal of making the classes we haven't played more attractive for the short campaign while keeping all classes reasonable because the party will likely still have some of the others. It also doesn't meet the unstated goal of trying out 13th Age style spell slots in 5e as a more permanent replacement for a normal campaign.

I would love your feedback on what is presented in the thread. But changing the rest frequency has been off the table for this discussion, so let's please try to keep the thread on target.
 

dmhelp

Explorer
You could triple combat maneuver uses, action surges, ki, and warlock spell slots recovered on long rest. Or start them at double and at level x in the class they triple. That would be less rule modifications. Or do that for martials and switch warlocks to long rest spell points.
 

This is not for everyone. Let me repeat that: THIS IS NOT FOR EVERYONE. This is not a general replacement / house rule.

My usual D&D group swaps DMs around, but we almost all do 1-3 encounters per day and not to many short rests. We pump up the difficulty to make good, deadly battles, but casters are almost never using cantrips so have the highest effectiveness per Action, barbarians can rage every encounter, paladins can smite most hits, etc. It's a fun game, but it has definitely affected class choices for the various campaigns we have done.

You change a lot of variables, which will make this hard to rebalance and confusing to remember. A lot of this could be accomplished by simply having short rest abilities recharge whenever initiative is rolled.
 

It doesn't meet the stated goal of making the classes we haven't played more attractive for the short campaign while keeping all classes reasonable because the party will likely still have some of the others.

Yes, it does make them more attractive. Increasing the frequency of encounters between long rests, and making short rests easier to get (a few minute breather) makes Fighters, Monks and Warlocks far more attractive.

It also doesn't meet the unstated goal of trying out 13th Age style spell slots in 5e as a more permanent replacement for a normal campaign.

That goal was unstated, so I cant really be held responsible for not knowing it existed.

I would love your feedback on what is presented in the thread.
That is my feedback. I think there are better ways of making short rest based classes more attractive compared to long rest ones.

As for the 13th age thing, I have no idea. I've never played it.
 

Well, I strongly dislike taking away all the lower level spell slots from casters, as the continued relevance of many low level spells is something I like about 5e. But if it suits your goals, it suits your goals.

However, if you are going to take away people's lower level spell slots then you should drop the one spell swap-out per level-up limitation on memorized casters. You should perhaps also lower the cost of Wizards copying spells of the levels that will face semi-retirement since they are obviously of less long term value.

Or just do a campaign without any full casters, rather than worry about balancing a whole system of how to handicap them. I suspect any player who doesn't anticipate this being the permenent rules of all their future D&D games would just look at this scheme and decide to put off their next caster character for some other campaign.
 

S'mon

Legend
You change a lot of variables, which will make this hard to rebalance and confusing to remember. A lot of this could be accomplished by simply having short rest abilities recharge whenever initiative is rolled.

That would be much easier to remember and would turn short rest powers into 4e style Encounter powers. If you want to keep the 'nova every fight' feel of a game where Long Rest classes only fight 1-3 times per LR, then I think this is the best aproach.

I tried turning SR powers into "x3 per Long Rest" powers, but it never felt quite right - worked ok for Fighters, but Monks got far too much Ki for important fights.

Personally I eventually embraced 5e's balance around an expectation of up to 6-8 fights per LR by making LR a week (w full HD recovery) while keeping SR unchanged but max SR 3/day; once I did that everything fell into place and the game now runs really well for me. I understand that's not an option for the OP but I would recommend it to others having issues.
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top