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


log in or register to remove this ad


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

We don't talk about Pun-Pun
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.
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top