D&D 5E Variant 5e?

[Harzel]

4. Ability to block, dodge, or parry as an active defense (opposed attack rolls) instead of standing still and using AC as the DC on attack rolls.

That is already a variant rule in the DMG. I have thought about using it, but haven't tried it yet with my current group.

Page or section? I don't recall ever seeing this, and even searching I can't find it.

 

[dave2008]

I don’t want to beat a dead horse here, cause I kinda already expressed that, and you weren’t interested. But, since you’re asking... D&D is fundamentally a game of resource management. That’s what its game mechanics are built around. To increase the difficulty (for the people playing the game,) one must either make it more difficult to manage resources, generally achieved by spreading them thinner, ...

I guess I just don't see how that makes the game harder. D&D is not a game you "win," so I don't see how spreading resources makes it harder for players. Harder for them to do what?

 

[dave2008]

Page or section? I don't recall ever seeing this, and even searching I can't find it.

I will have to check, maybe it was something non-official (like a UA) from the design team.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I think these look really good but the resting stuff need more work.

First off, HD become largely useless, because you can only spend 1 per short rest, but regain all on a long rest,and it's very unlikely you'll spend all your HD before a long rest except if you were low on HP before the long rest. It also means you should, if possible, always take repeated Short Rests to burn through HD before taking a long rest (healing kits just add a small financial cost to this, which will rapidly become irrelevant, and a bunch of fiddly tracking). That way you are more likely to still have HD for the next adventuring day if down much on HP.

I'd ditch the healing kit stuff because whilst it's cute, it will become a bunch of mildly annoying tracking in a few levels. Maybe just require it but don't expend uses.

I'd also drop the exhaustion recovery to 3 days, maybe less with help. Weeks just means mandatory total downtime and it's not really simulating much, just severely inconveniencing some of the party whilst the rest swan around town.

Finally I presume your intention is to spotlight/require a healing-focused PC, probably a Life Cleric? Because that will be the defacto impact in most groups. Their skillset will potentially prevent weeks or months of potentially adventure-ending downtime, and let PCs avoid 90%of the issues with the resting rules changes, especially if they blow most of their spell slots healing. Equally, parties without the ability to dodge Death Saves with magic and dodge HD use with magic will be in a very bad place. If that's the goal, you want to make that character basically required and spotlighted constantly, great!

 

[Charlaquin]

I guess I just don't see how that makes the game harder. D&D is not a game you "win," so I don't see how spreading resources makes it harder for players. Harder for them to do what?

You don’t “win” D&D per se, but you do have goals and face obstacles to achieving them, and the game is largely focused on trying to overcome those obstacles and achieve your goals. You essentially “win” every time you successfully complete an adventure or side-quest. At any rate, this becomes more difficult to do when your resources are taxed throughout the course of pursuing your goal. That is, by D&D’s design, the primary nature of the game’s challenge.

 

[Charlaquin]

I will have to check, maybe it was something non-official (like a UA) from the design team.

There was a UA back in 2015 with a number of variant rules, one of which was “players make all rolls.” It got the math for the DCs of “saving throw checks” wrong though. Should be 14 + mods instead of 11 + mods.

https://media.wizards.com/2015/downloads/dnd/UA5_VariantRules.pdf

 

[Tony Vargas]

D&D is not a game you "win," so I don't see how spreading resources makes it harder for players.

It's cooperative rather than competitive (among players, some versions of D&D can run OK as a DM v Players competition, with some provisos - though 5e isn't one of 'em), you 'win' by surviving the adventure and gaining a favorable result. D&D is also arguably (a tad pretentiously, perhaps) an infinite game - 'winning' is continuing to play.

Harder for them to do what?

Complete an adventure successfully without PC deaths.

 

[dave2008]

I think these look really good but the resting stuff need more work.

First off, HD become largely useless, because you can only spend 1 per short rest, but regain all on a long rest,and it's very unlikely you'll spend all your HD before a long rest except if you were low on HP before the long rest. It also means you should, if possible, always take repeated Short Rests to burn through HD before taking a long rest (healing kits just add a small financial cost to this, which will rapidly become irrelevant, and a bunch of fiddly tracking). That way you are more likely to still have HD for the next adventuring day if down much on HP.

I had the same thought after I wrote it. Not sure what the solution is yet. Any thoughts?

I'd ditch the healing kit stuff because whilst it's cute, it will become a bunch of mildly annoying tracking in a few levels. Maybe just require it but don't expend uses.

It is primarily fluff for those who don't want, but there are some who feel it is need for a bit of "realism." It limits what you can do by RAW, but I wouldn't expect most to follow it. It is one of those things I wish was the default and the variant rule didn't require them.

I'd also drop the exhaustion recovery to 3 days, maybe less with help. Weeks just means mandatory total downtime and it's not really simulating much, just severely inconveniencing some of the party whilst the rest swan around town.

I don't see the big difference, but really my response is the same as the one for the healing kit issue. It is there for those who feel quick healing breaks their ability to feel the fiction. It is an issue for some.

Finally I presume your intention is to spotlight/require a healing-focused PC, probably a Life Cleric? Because that will be the defacto impact in most groups. Their skillset will potentially prevent weeks or months of potentially adventure-ending downtime, and let PCs avoid 90%of the issues with the resting rules changes, especially if they blow most of their spell slots healing. Equally, parties without the ability to dodge Death Saves with magic and dodge HD use with magic will be in a very bad place. If that's the goal, you want to make that character basically required and spotlighted constantly, great!

No, my group doesn't have a cleric. The intent is specifically to make fighting more dangerous so they find ways to avoid fighting.

 

[dave2008]

You don’t “win” D&D per se, but you do have goals and face obstacles to achieving them, and the game is largely focused on trying to overcome those obstacles and achieve your goals. You essentially “win” every time you successfully complete an adventure or side-quest. At any rate, this becomes more difficult to do when your resources are taxed throughout the course of pursuing your goal. That is, by D&D’s design, the primary nature of the game’s challenge.

I don't generally run attrition based adventures (I only homebrew); so I don't see that. We have between 0-6 battles in an adventuring day, but typically 2-3. That will not change. What will change for us is how dangerous those 2-3 fights are and the consequences for them. In fact, the hope is they try to avoid fighting when they can. Simply put, things often become much harder for characters and players in my game if they are forced to wait on a recovering comrade for a week.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I had the same thought after I wrote it. Not sure what the solution is yet. Any thoughts?

If you want to put a restriction on how many HD can be spent in a single short rest, you'd probably want to base it on level. 1/2 or 1/3rd or 1/4 you level in HD or something. So it doesn't trivialize as you level, like Second Wind.

It is primarily fluff for those who don't want, but there are some who feel it is need for a bit of "realism."
I don't see the big difference, but really my response is the same as the one for the healing kit issue. It is there for those who feel quick healing breaks their ability to feel the fiction. It is an issue for some.

It's a problematic issue, since hit points, are at the bottom of it, and if you interpret hit points in such a way as to /make/ 'quick' healing an issue in the fiction, you've just made gaining hps as you level an even more egregious issue.

No, my group doesn't have a cleric.

Paladin? Bard? Druid? Ranger?

The intent is specifically to make fighting more dangerous so they find ways to avoid fighting.

Is the intent to make adventuring 'days' shorter and short rests less desirable, so that you don't come near the hypothetical 6-8 encounter/2-3 short rest 'day' at which D&D theoretically achieves a modicum of class balance (at least around overall DPR)?

We have between 0-6 battles in an adventuring day, but typically 2-3. That will not change. What will change for us is how dangerous those 2-3 fights are and the consequences for them.

...nope, sounds like you're already there.