D&D 5E What Houserules Do You Use?

[Caliban]

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?577158-A-Collection-of-Minor-House-Rules

 

[Satyrn]

I use the following houserules:

Those are terrific!

 

[Hriston]

I use a set of houserules that's meant to emulate how ranged attacks work in some earlier editions. To summarize:

• Attacks with blowguns, bows, and crossbows have disadvantage if your target has higher initiative than you, and you move more than half your speed. Elves using a longbow or a shortbow can move up to their full speed and attack without disadvantage by moving up to half their speed before firing, and then moving the remainder of their speed afterwards.

• Heavy crossbows can be loaded or fired as an action (but not both) if you move less than half your speed. If you move more than half your speed, you can't load. Crossbow Expert lets you ignore this.

• Longbows, shortbows, blowguns, daggers, and darts can be used to make an additional attack as a reaction you can use at your initiative minus 10 if you don't move on your turn, but not if there's a hostile creature within 5 feet of you that can see you.

• Darts can be used for a bonus action attack if you move no more than half your speed.

 

[Lord_Blacksteel]

I'm really surprised to see lots of house rules on slower natural healing or exhaustion when dropping to 0. That has to really slow the game down and be frustrating for the players. Players don't want to constantly enter combat at less than full strength. Players will simply spend more time resting and not adventuring. It also greatly increases the need for a dedicated healer.

D&D isn't the type of game for this level of real-world simulation. If you want an additional "burden" on players, I recommend enforcing the lifestyle rules and placing requirements on maintaining a certain lifestyle level to gain the benefits of healing.

I agree with you in general but I suspect this is mainly done by those looking for the feel of earlier editions where 1hp per level per night of rest was pretty common. The only fast healing was magical healing. The cleric lobby is strong

 

[GlassJaw]

I agree with you in general but I suspect this is mainly done by those looking for the feel of earlier editions where 1hp per level per night of rest was pretty common. The only fast healing was magical healing. The cleric lobby is strong

That's really interesting, and makes sense. Non-magical healing was traditionally harsh in the editions. I grew up with AD&D myself and have played every edition but I like the fact that 5e can be played without a cleric or dedicated healer. I always question the goal of slowing down play for the players and making the risk much higher the characters to adventure.

 

[GlassJaw]

While I haven't altered the rest/recovery mechanics at all, I do grant a level of exhaustion when a PC is knocked to 0HP. I find that this adds a certain gravity to going down that is otherwise not there. It also reduces the "whack a mole" effect that sometimes happens as a healer gets the fighter on his feet so he can attack and then go down again when a monster hits him, then the healer gets him back up, and so on.

Well it reduces the "whack a mole" effect because you've introduced something way more penalizing. Players will be less inclined to bring someone back during combat because they will be less effective. They are already most likely spending their action in combat - the most precious resource in the game - to bring back an ally that will be penalized. And if that ally goes down again, the penalty gets worse and worse (I assume the exhaustion levels are cumulative).

In addition, by discouraging bringing back allies during combat, you have now introduced a much higher chance of a TPK.

 

[CrimsonCarcharodon]

If you mean modifications or additions to player characters material or actual rules of the game, I am using zero House Rules.

If you mean the metagaming kind of House Rules, I am mainly using two:

- allowing a player to choose an alternative fate in case her character dies
- vetoing intra-party violent conflicts, such as stealing or trying to kill another PC

Yeah, by house rules I mean changes or additions to the game rules. The metagaming kind, which I'd probably call table rules or group rules, would make for an interesting thread, though.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Well it reduces the "whack a mole" effect because you've introduced something way more penalizing. Players will be less inclined to bring someone back during combat because they will be less effective. They are already most likely spending their action in combat - the most precious resource in the game - to bring back an ally that will be penalized. And if that ally goes down again, the penalty gets worse and worse (I assume the exhaustion levels are cumulative).

In addition, by discouraging bringing back allies during combat, you have now introduced a much higher chance of a TPK.

Yeah, there is a penalty for being brought to 0 HP under my house rule. I don't mind that there is a penalty, so to me that's not a criticism. I also don't think that the penalty is all that severe...at least not initially. Didadvantage on ability checks during combat isn't all that severe most of the time. Now, if you start adding levels of exhaustion, then it gets serious pretty quick.

So when someone drops in combat, it becomes a pretty big deal. Which is what I want.

As for why it reduces the whack a mole effect, it's not because the other players decide to simply leave the PC there. It's more because they realize they need to do what they can to get that PC out of danger before they can consider restoring any HP. But more importantly, the players do everything they can to try and prevent anyone from dropping to 0 HP.

As for the chance of a TPK, I don't really follow how I've increased the chance for that under this rule....but given how much the DM must WANT to inflict a TPK for one to happen, I'm not concerned about it.

I get that the rule may not be for you, but it really works at our table. Yes, it makes things a little tougher for the players...but it also makes them play a bit more cautiously. Which I think is something needed given the mechanics involved for PC death. I don't want my players to not consider being knocked out in combat to be worrisome because they'll most likely make their death saves and so on.

 

[Blue]

I'm really surprised to see lots of house rules on slower natural healing or exhaustion when dropping to 0. That has to really slow the game down and be frustrating for the players. Players don't want to constantly enter combat at less than full strength. Players will simply spend more time resting and not adventuring. It also greatly increases the need for a dedicated healer.

I think you are making an improper assumption, against what the poster said.

Yes, players like to go in fully rested. Do you let them long rest after every encounter? By your logic they should and will.

The poster said that they spread out their encounters - so it's likely the same frequency of encounters to rests as there is in normal play, but now any day that has an encounter don't need to shoehorn in 5+ more encounters to end up being a standard adventuring day - the DM has more leniency in when those can arrive in order to better fit the story.

With a game that is enjoying the poster's "not frequent combat", it sounds like it's not "slowing the game down" at all.

 

[Blue]

2 - Death and Exhaustion

To avoid players healing a few hp to a downed friend only to keep him up for a round, and not caring wether he/she gets knocked out again, when a player gets to 0 hp, and comes back to consciousness, he/she gains two levels of exhaustion.

This way, getting knocked out feels a little bit more dangerous, since you need a long rest to recover from a level of exhaustion. Three downs means death. And if you get knocked out two times, you better rest instead of going adventuring the day after.

But even with four level of exhaustions, the player can at least keep his/her main stats working... though admittedly, he/she won't be any good at anything else.

This seems like it would greatly slow down play if you keep the standard that a long rest only removes one level of exhaustion.