D&D General Weapons should break left and right

[Remathilis]

Nope. 5e is a ruleset invented by WotC for the two most recent versions of their game D&D (along with its associated IP), and used subsequently by a number of other games, which are therefore also 5e. You want to give the 5e ruleset a different name to ease confusion? I'm open to suggestions.

Lord of the Rings is D&D.

The Lord of the Rings - Marketplace - D&D Beyond

<i>The Lord of the Rings Roleplaying</i> adapts the rules of fifth edition DUNGEONS & DRAGONS into a new, immersive experience based on the works of J.R.R. Tolkien. This beautifully illustrated volume contains 240 pages of everything you need to create exciting adventures, including six...

marketplace.dndbeyond.com

 

[AlViking]

It can apply, if the GM and players want it to. Other possibilities than WotC's take exist, and there's no general reason why we should assume they don't or can't. I'm quite clear where I get my houserules and homebrew from, so I really don't understand your objection. If you insist that only WotC's official rules apply to your table, that fine; go ahead and say so, and I won't engage with you further regarding the subject. But there are many way to address an issue or topic in D&D-like games, and WotC's way is but a small sliver of possibilities, and not generally more important or more valid than any other. Just more popular.

I think paladin's steeds are underpowered to the point of being useless a level or two after you first get the ability to summon them. So as a house rule, I give them HD and proficiency bonus equal to the paladin's level. If a discussion about mounts come up I may mention it. But I won't call it D&D, I'll specify that it's a house rule. I would do the same if I had gotten the rule from some other supplement.

When you say "D&D does have <insert whatever you get from some D&D compatible supplement>" if you don't qualify that it comes from some third party product it's confusing, misleading and not true. That doesn't mean it's less valid, worthy or a worse rule.

I have nothing more to add.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Lord of the Rings is D&D.

The Lord of the Rings - Marketplace - D&D Beyond

<i>The Lord of the Rings Roleplaying</i> adapts the rules of fifth edition DUNGEONS & DRAGONS into a new, immersive experience based on the works of J.R.R. Tolkien. This beautifully illustrated volume contains 240 pages of everything you need to create exciting adventures, including six...

marketplace.dndbeyond.com

That version? Absolutely in my view. The One Ring? Not so much.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think paladin's steeds are underpowered to the point of being useless a level or two after you first get the ability to summon them. So as a house rule, I give them HD and proficiency bonus equal to the paladin's level. If a discussion about mounts come up I may mention it. But I won't call it D&D, I'll specify that it's a house rule. I would do the same if I had gotten the rule from some other supplement.

When you say "D&D does have <insert whatever you get from some D&D compatible supplement>" if you don't qualify that it comes from some third party product it's confusing, misleading and not true. That doesn't mean it's less valid, worthy or a worse rule.

I have nothing more to add.

Again, please indicate when I have done this.

 

[Umbran]

Level Up and TotV are not D&D in the strictest sense, but they absolutely are 5e and they share a lot of DNA with other D&D-like games with varying rulesets.

And exactly what game do you think this forum, or this thread, is dedicated to?

Mod note:

Um, Micah? Please note that we have a separate forum for Level Up, and another for D&D Variants.

So, while you cam mention them, please realize that you should not dominate discussion with them here.

 

[Staffan]

By the rules it only happens if you full on retreat. Retreat is defined as away from melee, so towards melee with others is not a retreat under that rule. The same applies to Withdraw, which also requires a retreat away the combat. So advancing on the wizard does not allow the PC in melee to follow for free.

To get the free attack, the NPC/Monster must be retreating away from the entire combat. If no retreat is happening, not attack can happen.

So if I move away from being in melee with the hill giant and get into melee with the orc instead, I'm fine. I can then retreat from the orc, taking an attack from them rather than from the hill giant. That sure sounds like a reasonable interpretation.

So the troll attacking on 7 hits before Delsenora's roll of 9+1. It hits before she even begins casting her spell, and yet the spell still fizzles. In 2e to cast a spell you could not receive ANY damage prior to the spell going off on your initiative number. If you weren't playing it that way, it's no wonder you guys rarely had Magic Users lose any spells.

I think some people are comparing to 1e rules, or at least some interpretation thereof (1e initiative rules are famously unclear). As I remember the gold box games, they used to cycle through my PCs letting them take actions which mostly happened right away, but spellcasting had a delay before the spell took effect (and IIRC you had to set the target for AOEs when choosing the spell). If your caster was hit before their turn entirely, spellcasting would not be an option for them, and if they were hit in between their turn and the spell's release the spell would fizzle.

 

[Maxperson]

So if I move away from being in melee with the hill giant and get into melee with the orc instead, I'm fine. I can then retreat from the orc, taking an attack from them rather than from the hill giant. That sure sounds like a reasonable interpretation.

I think you have to retreat from "the melee," Which would be both creatures. You aren't specifically retreating from a creature

I think some people are comparing to 1e rules, or at least some interpretation thereof (1e initiative rules are famously unclear). As I remember the gold box games, they used to cycle through my PCs letting them take actions which mostly happened right away, but spellcasting had a delay before the spell took effect (and IIRC you had to set the target for AOEs when choosing the spell). If your caster was hit before their turn entirely, spellcasting would not be an option for them, and if they were hit in between their turn and the spell's release the spell would fifizzle.

What a lot of people are forgetting is that rounds were 1 full minute and the initiative wasn't when you first get to do your thing. You are doing your thing for the entire round up until your initiative number happens

The fighter is ducking, weaving, carrying, and swinging many times, but the roll on his initiative is when he has a swing that has a chance to hit.

The wizard is casting the spell for the entire round, completing the spell on his initiative number.

If the wizard is hit at ANY point prior to his initiative number, he loses the spell as his concentration is broken. The initiative modifier for spell level is not the time period where the spell is being cast, like some seem to think.

 

[Lanefan]

While logical, one could say and players would also argue that tooth/fang and claws and other such weaponized body parts should be breaking sometimes as well.

Easily reflected by the creature taking damage when "weapon breaks" would otherwise be the case.

If the game had specific-location damage rules then that damage would go to the paw or mouth etc. as appropriate; but those rules don't exist and so generic damage is all we're left with.

 

[Lanefan]

The problem is these two elements cancel each other out. I have my golf bag full with my dragon slaying sword, giant slaying axe, and undead slaying mace that I save ONLY for those types of fights due to the chance of breakage. Then I get fireballed by a wizard, roll poorly and lose them all anyway.

You'd have to roll extremely poorly to lose them all.

Pulling Talons from a Deck, though - yeah, can't help you with that.

Id rather have only one of those weapons and barring extraordinary circumstances keep them forever than have a bunch that snap; or explode every time I roll a 1.

Different strokes, I guess; I prefer the more easy come easy go style. It's a fairly easy dial for a DM to tweak to achieve either preference, though, so probably not a hill worth dying on or even getting hurt on..

 

[Lanefan]

Please don't introduce a body injury system into D&D. I've never seen a system where death, dismemberment or permanent injury isn't always hurting players far more than it ever makes things fun.

Counterpoint: please do!

There's loads of design space for lingering or permanent injuries, also something has to explain at the rules-and-mechanics level how the bartender got that permanent limp during his adventuring career. Once you add that explanation in any form beyond DM handwave then - bam! - you've got a permanent injuries system.

Also, keep in mind that except at very low levels adventurers usually have access to people (either themselves or NPCs) who can cast spells like Heal, Regeneration, and so forth if such are really needed.