D&D 5E What requested rules change have you refused to change?


log in or register to remove this ad


bloodtide

Adventurer
How does this work in 5e? The DM picks the creature for all of the Conjure * spells in the PHB, the player only picks the number/CR. Are you actually giving the spell a big buff in that characters can effectively limit the choices to the one they want by limiting what material components they are carrying?
It's more for the converted 3X spells in 5E.
I assume this is to speed up the game, but is it fun?
Yes.
I can't speak for this specific rule, but we have a requirement to resolve your turn in 30 seconds: Declare action and make any rolls (attack and damage) required. We did this to speed things up but found it actually made the game more fun too. Combats feel much more energetic now and everyone pays attention because it all happens so fast.
I like a fast game. I try to get and keep players that like a fast game. Some players like to hog the spotlight or even just ruin the game for everyone....they don't last too long in my game.
 

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
I won't roll for hit points. I had a years-long streak of really bad luck when every hit point roll turned up a '1', so I'm pretty much done with that one. If a DM insists on it then I'll have a choice to make: is this game expected to be sufficiently good that I'm willing to cheat to play?
Hard to cheat when all such rolls are (in theory) done on the table and observed by someone else.

I'm not sure I'd play in a game where we didn't roll for h.p.
 


CleverNickName

Limit Break Dancing
As a DM, what request for a house or varient rule (or use of RAW instead of your home rule) by one or more players have you refused to change? Are there any rule changes that even if the entire group of players wanted changed, you would instead rather not run the game?

As a Player, what DM-proposed rules change have you refused to go along with? Are they any rule changes that would bother you enough to walk out on a campaign?
As a DM:
One time, the players all got together and petitioned me to convert the Item Crafting feats from 3rd Edition and import them into the 5E campaign. I thought they were joking and started laughing, and then I realized they were serious. "Um, sorry about that," I said. "We're gonna keep using the downtime rules for that."

As a player:
The DM was getting frustrated with his battles ending too quickly, so he banned the Banishment spell outright. No discussion, no forewarning...we were in the middle of combat and he flatly refused to allow the spell. "I'm tired of you guys instantly defeating my monsters!" He then told us to remove the spell from our character sheets, and replace it with something else. So I replaced it with Polymorph.
 

James Gasik

Legend
Supporter
As a DM:
One time, the players all got together and petitioned me to convert the Item Crafting feats from 3rd Edition and import them into the 5E campaign. I thought they were joking and started laughing, and then I realized they were serious. "Um, sorry about that," I said. "We're gonna keep using the downtime rules for that."

As a player:
The DM was getting frustrated with his battles ending too quickly, so he banned the Banishment spell outright. No discussion, no forewarning...we were in the middle of combat and he flatly refused to allow the spell. "I'm tired of you guys instantly defeating my monsters!" He then told us to remove the spell from our character sheets, and replace it with something else. So I replaced it with Polymorph.
Wow, like, I understand frustration, but there's so many spells that can let you crowd control enemies so that fights are easier, it's hard to see how banning one is going to help matters. Plus, it really erodes trust in the DM if they're going to suddenly decide at any moment that an effective tactic can be removed from play.
 

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin
As a player:
The DM was getting frustrated with his battles ending too quickly, so he banned the Banishment spell outright. No discussion, no forewarning...we were in the middle of combat and he flatly refused to allow the spell. "I'm tired of you guys instantly defeating my monsters!" He then told us to remove the spell from our character sheets, and replace it with something else. So I replaced it with Polymorph.
Banishment doesn't even defeat the monsters---they come back after a minute... :confused:
 

CleverNickName

Limit Break Dancing
Banishment doesn't even defeat the monsters---they come back after a minute... :confused:
Yep, I know...unless they are from another plane, in which case they are banished back to wherever they came from. So we were careful to only use it on elementals, fiends, and the like. The first time we used it, we used it against a vrock. The second time, we banished the DM's evil NPC rakshasa. When we started to cast it on his pet balor, he broke out the ban-hammer.
 

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin
Yep, I know...unless they are from another plane, in which case they are banished back to wherever they came from. So we were careful to only use it on elementals, fiends, and the like. The first time we used it, we used it against a vrock. The second time, we banished the DM's evil NPC rakshasa. When we started to cast it on his pet balor, he broke out the ban-hammer.
That is a better use than what I normally see, but then the DM can simply have the creature come BACK, using whatever narrative means they want. I mean, a Rakshasa can plane shift 1/day, so unless it is the same day, it comes back.

Also, Balor's are CHA +12 save (with Advantage), Rakshasa are CHA +5 save (immune to banishment unless upcast 7th or better), and the Vrock is only CHA +2 save (also with Advantage). Even if the caster has a spell save DC 19, the Balor will save over 90% of the time, Rakshasa is immune, and failing that 35% to save, even the Vrock will save 36%! And if the spell save is lower, the chances of course improve.

So, obviously that DM over-reacted IMO.
 


Micah Sweet

Legend
in 2e I had a DM carry around a binder (bigger then my high school trapper keeper) full of role master charts, and if you rolled a 1 or a 20, or if you hit the AC by more then 10 (keep in mind that was hard cause ac only had a 20pt swing) you had to break out D100s and roll on multi charts...
Oh, I loved those charts! The first non-D&D game I ever got to read was MERP, and I spent hours pouring over those charts and trying to find a way to make them work in D&D.
 


Micah Sweet

Legend
Wow, like, I understand frustration, but there's so many spells that can let you crowd control enemies so that fights are easier, it's hard to see how banning one is going to help matters. Plus, it really erodes trust in the DM if they're going to suddenly decide at any moment that an effective tactic can be removed from play.
Banishment is a popular way to end fights. I've had it happen more than once in games I run. But that kind of change should happen between sessions.
 

James Gasik

Legend
Supporter
The way I've seen Banishment run is, you remove a powerful enemy from the fight, then by the time it's slated to return, everyone has gathered around to try and kill it on sight.

People seemed pretty stoked by this concept, but I was like, all that for one guy? Sure it's a Charisma save, but there are lower level spells that can render whole groups of enemies out of the fight long enough to murder their allies. Never used Banishment myself, past level 2 spells, I'm looking for multi-target options.
 

tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
The way I've seen Banishment run is, you remove a powerful enemy from the fight, then by the time it's slated to return, everyone has gathered around to try and kill it on sight.

People seemed pretty stoked by this concept, but I was like, all that for one guy? Sure it's a Charisma save, but there are lower level spells that can render whole groups of enemies out of the fight long enough to murder their allies. Never used Banishment myself, past level 2 spells, I'm looking for multi-target options.
My experience is the same t's completely anticlimactic and uninteresting at the table
 


Azuresun

Adventurer

They were looking for an examples of "Mother May I?" design choices in another thread, if you want to know why it is a problem look no further.

Player (thinking): Hmm at 5th level I can select "One beast of challenge rating 2 or lower" and get double the number appear.
Player: I cast 5th level Conjurer Animals, can I have a pair of Saber-toothed Tigers?
DM: No you can have a Frog riding a Camel and be happy about it.

Ah cool, so I can summon a half-dozen Pixies and turn all the party into giant apes, with a few save-or-loses left over to throw at the enemy?
 

MNblockhead

A Title Much Cooler Than Anything on the Old Site
As a player:
The DM was getting frustrated with his battles ending too quickly, so he banned the Banishment spell outright. No discussion, no forewarning...we were in the middle of combat and he flatly refused to allow the spell. "I'm tired of you guys instantly defeating my monsters!" He then told us to remove the spell from our character sheets, and replace it with something else. So I replaced it with Polymorph.
As a DM who have felt the pain of you DM, but not to the point of banning a spell mid combat, I had to laugh at this. Laughing at my own pain but still funny.

Recently, in my campaign, however, the issue is a bit the opposite. I'm in tier four of play in the fourth year of a campaign and the baddies have a lot of magic at their disposal. I hate taking a character out of the battle with hold person, banishment, polymorph, etc. But it seems absolutely necessary to make combat a challenge. I don't feel too bad. After all, its kinda on the other party members if nobody casts dispel magic, counterspell, etc. Also, it is something intelligent magic using baddies would absolutely take advantage of. Also, it is better (less boring) than adding more baddies and/or bloating their hit points.

I'm backing Matt Coleville's Flee, Mortals! Kickstarter campaign and I like some of the ideas he has for monster abilities and stat blocks. I'm always looking for new mechanics to keep monsters fighting longer and countering player powers in ways that are more interesting then making players lose turns or just adding HP, adding more combatants, or just counterspelling. Things like abilities to transfer damage or effects to a minion, limited legendary actions and nova abilities for non-legendary mooks, etc. can keep things interesting.
 

MNblockhead

A Title Much Cooler Than Anything on the Old Site
Yep, I know...unless they are from another plane, in which case they are banished back to wherever they came from. So we were careful to only use it on elementals, fiends, and the like. The first time we used it, we used it against a vrock. The second time, we banished the DM's evil NPC rakshasa. When we started to cast it on his pet balor, he broke out the ban-hammer.
Banishment can still be a powerful tool even when fighting creatures on their own plane. Taking an enemy out of combat for a minute can be huge but giving the banishing party advantage in the action economy. I've had combats where the party banished a big bad, mopped up the minions and positioned themselves and readied actions and spells to quickly end the big bad when it reappeared.
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top