log in or register to remove this ad

 

D&D 5E What Single Thing Would You Add


log in or register to remove this ad

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
Which isn't to say that THAC0 didn't have its day. It did. It was a definite improvement over having to look up your attack result on a table. It's just left behind by an even better improvement.
Oh yeah, steps of improvement. Though if you are saying the charts and THAC0 were separate my memories must be mixing together - I remember the charts where there was a several options where a 20 would still hit, not just the mathematically one that THAC0 would say, and but not all like with modern. I seem to rememebr those as being the same thing, with THAC0 being the more convient but the charts still holding true. But it was long, long ago and if that was different editions then it's my memory mushing them together.

Though I do remember every DM ignoring the weapon vs. armor table, with customized modifiers to hit or miss based on the weapon type and the AC.
 


Sacrosanct

Legend
But that's an issue with 3E that has nothing to do with THAC0. If you added in the number of bonuses and modifications to a system that used THAC0 it would be just be even worse than what 3E had.
But you didn't have that with THAC0. You did with an edition of D&D. One people still play.

Therefore, again, ascending isn't always better. It's contextual. Making claims that ascending is always better is just wrong. Even if you get past the subjective part about what people prefer liking, or how people do math differently in their head (believe it or not, lots of people feel no different subtracting than adding).
 

BrassDragon

Explorer
Incremental advances from 13th Age: you can pick a feature from your next level up as a DM-sanctioned reward. This way, you don't suddenly have a bunch of new powers, skills and hit points blinking into existence at level-up like it's a videogame and players can get used to having more options gradually. It also lets DMs more easily craft scenes that lets the new advances emerge in the fiction.
 

Oofta

Title? I don't need no stinkin' title.
But you didn't have that with THAC0. You did with an edition of D&D. One people still play.

Therefore, again, ascending isn't always better. It's contextual. Making claims that ascending is always better is just wrong. Even if you get past the subjective part about what people prefer liking, or how people do math differently in their head (believe it or not, lots of people feel no different subtracting than adding).
How is it relevant? Take any version of the game. Add in the modifiers from 3.x. THAC0 is going to make that final calculation with modifiers more difficult than adding them all together. Take out the modifiers from 3.x and THAC0 is still more difficult for most people.

But you're going to continue to do this so ... have a good one.
 

cbwjm

Hero
Incremental advances from 13th Age: you can pick a feature from your next level up as a DM-sanctioned reward. This way, you don't suddenly have a bunch of new powers, skills and hit points blinking into existence at level-up like it's a videogame and players can get used to having more options gradually. It also lets DMs more easily craft scenes that lets the new advances emerge in the fiction.
Been talking with a friend about advancement in our current game and it can be a bit weird when you have mechanics vs fiction. He is an artificer and he is going to pick up a level of wizard which means he suddenly gets a spellbook, some cantrips, and has 6 spells written in the book. There is no real fictional backstory for this, I don't require it either, but it is a little weird. If there had been a local wizard that he was training with then maybe it would make more sense. Also the lack of downtime makes it even more jarring.
 

Lord Twig

Adventurer
Weapon descriptions in the PHB.

Here's a challenge: Go into the PHB and find what a Breastplate is. Then look for a description of what a Glaive is. How is it different from a Halberd? Good luck!
 


pogre

Legend
I want something no one else I know does: A mass combat system that uses tons of miniatures and works with 5e magic.

This quote from the original PHB always captured my imagination:
And perhaps a war between players will be going on (with battles actually fought out on the tabletop with miniature figures) one night, while on the next, characters of these two contending players are helping each other to survive somewhere in a wilderness.

The problem is - It's tough for me to imagine that a couple of 5e 6th level wizards could not wipe out a medieval-sized army.

Even the Battle System series came up with a different set of rules for magic used in warfare.

There is certainly no real incentive to make such a set of rules commercially. I also recognize the vast majority of D&D players would much prefer a narrative approach for mass combat.

So, it remains a pipedream of mine.
 

ART!

Hero
The three Defenses (Saving Throws): Fortitude, Reflex, Will.
It's funny: I get the attraction to saves separated from ability scores, and having only 3, but I also like saves not being its separate thing and instead wrapping them in something else that's a core part of the system. Of course, doing so makes ability scores more important, which I know gets a lot of complaints. Honestly, I kind of miss the old saves like "Dragon Breath", "Spells", etc. - although why magic staffs and magic wands had separate saves is anyone's guess.
Incremental advances from 13th Age: you can pick a feature from your next level up as a DM-sanctioned reward. This way, you don't suddenly have a bunch of new powers, skills and hit points blinking into existence at level-up like it's a videogame and players can get used to having more options gradually. It also lets DMs more easily craft scenes that lets the new advances emerge in the fiction.
I like this A LOT. I'd definitely be excited about a streamlines system or quidelines for doling those out.
 

billd91

Hobbit on Quest
It's funny: I get the attraction to saves separated from ability scores, and having only 3, but I also like saves not being its separate thing and instead wrapping them in something else that's a core part of the system. Of course, doing so makes ability scores more important, which I know gets a lot of complaints. Honestly, I kind of miss the old saves like "Dragon Breath", "Spells", etc. - although why magic staffs and magic wands had separate saves is anyone's guess.
Yeah, I understand some of the appeal. The one real benefit was most didn't tie directly to a stat so it was anybody's narration why a character avoided some of the damage from the dragon's breath or fireball.
And it could be different for everybody. It's too bad that the saving throw system was such a mess in so many other ways, though.
 

rmcoen

Explorer
I want something no one else I know does: A mass combat system that uses tons of miniatures and works with 5e magic.

This quote from the original PHB always captured my imagination:


The problem is - It's tough for me to imagine that a couple of 5e 6th level wizards could not wipe out a medieval-sized army.

Even the Battle System series came up with a different set of rules for magic used in warfare.

There is certainly no real incentive to make such a set of rules commercially. I also recognize the vast majority of D&D players would much prefer a narrative approach for mass combat.

So, it remains a pipedream of mine.
The issue, I think, is well Answered by the Sword of Truth series. The wizards in one army are countered by the wizards in the other army, leaving the actual resolution of the battle in the hands of the soldiers. However, if one army doesn't have wizards... then you're right: the wizardless army dies!

Previous editions - 3rd FRCS I think - actually had "War Magic" (and the War Mage prestige class) with massive spells that were meant to buff/cripple/kill over an enormous area. They were more "rituals" than "I prepare Buff Army Mark I along with shield, web, and fly today", but they got the idea across for this kind of thing. 6th level wizards aren't usually facing foes with 5-10 hp so a "10 fire damage in a 100'radius" spell isn't useful in the dungeon - but it wipes out hundreds of "normal" soldiers on a battlefield!

5e could easily have similar "ritual-only" spells added to it. Take a spell, downgrade its effect as you upscale its area (or maybe create "upcast" versions that scale area instead of power) and there you have BattleMagic!
 

rmcoen

Explorer
Incremental advances from 13th Age: you can pick a feature from your next level up as a DM-sanctioned reward. This way, you don't suddenly have a bunch of new powers, skills and hit points blinking into existence at level-up like it's a videogame and players can get used to having more options gradually. It also lets DMs more easily craft scenes that lets the new advances emerge in the fiction.
In all my previous campaign (but not this 5e one, for some reason), I always ask the players to tell me at level up "What are you doing for next level up?" That way our narrative includes the little activities (and sometimes pertinent large actions) that lead up to this achievement. In the case mentioned by someone else, between 5th and 6th, the artificer/wannabe-mage would have acquired a spellbook. And spent evenings around the campfire trying to master cantrips. Maybe played "catch" with the rogue and his throwing knives, trying out a shield spell. So when 6th level comes along, there's been constant effort all along to explain this new level of mage.

The War Cleric in my game, first time in the Provincial Capital, immediately sought out a trainer; he made contact with a retired cavalry Colonel, and spent some downtime (and money!) with the gentlemen while the others were Researching, Pit Fighting, and Building Renown. I asked why. "I want Mounted Combat [feat] at 4th level; I figured someone should teach me how!" The Battlemaster Fighter's player heard this, and immediately said "I make a point of visiting every bar in every town we stop in from now on. I make sure at least one bar fight happens every night; I hope the Cleric will patch me up! I want Tavern Brawler [feat] at 4th!"
 

rmcoen

Explorer
It's funny: I get the attraction to saves separated from ability scores, and having only 3, but I also like saves not being its separate thing and instead wrapping them in something else that's a core part of the system. Of course, doing so makes ability scores more important, which I know gets a lot of complaints. Honestly, I kind of miss the old saves like "Dragon Breath", "Spells", etc. - although why magic staffs and magic wands had separate saves is anyone's guess.

I like this A LOT. I'd definitely be excited about a streamlines system or quidelines for doling those out.
I force my players' PCs to spend a day of training per level-being-gained to actually level up. That doesn't happen too often. Accordingly, when they have crested the "ding!" moment, I let them choose essentially "one thing" about the new level that they gain access to. Generic option available to everyone is "1 less than average HP"; generally I give a new class ability at 1-3 times per 1-worse-rest-category, or a new spell level slot (but no spells known/prepared of that level), or a new level of spells known/prepared (but no slot, use 2 of the next lowest). They just hit 5th level, a proficiency bonus increase, so they were also able to choose "5 times/short rest, add +1 to an attack/skill/save before the roll". It works out, a little side benefit until they can get somewhere safe to train.
[If anyone cares, the rogue took "Uncanny Dodge, 3/short rest"; the cleric surprisingly took "+1 to attack/skill/save 5/rest"; the bard took "upgrade inspiration to d8s"; the warlock took his new Invocation (as an "at will", it was initially limited to "3/rest"); and the Battlemaster/Rogue took "Cunning Action, 3/rest".]
 

rmcoen

Explorer
Whoops, I forgot this was a "one thing you'd add", and not a general discussion of THAC0 ;-P ... I mean of topics.

I would chime in with "weapon and armor distinctions" (breaking the wish rules by using "and"). As someone else said pages earlier, the PF2 weapon table makes every weapon slightly different; that's an easy place to start. I cannot stand that the only distinction between warhammer, longsword, and battleaxe (besides the picture) is the damage type... and after 3rd level, that hardly matters because everything after "skeleton" that resists damage resists all mundane types!

I want the fighter to look at the giant scorpion and think "should I use the axe, and try to chop off a leg or that stinger? Or should I use the spike on my warhammer to puncture that hard shell? The sword stays sheathed... it's of no use here!" I don't necessarily need the 1e "weapons vs. armor" table... no one memorizes all that, even for the own weapon (even when it was helpfully on the character sheet!) -- I'm looking for a minor flavorful/elegant distinction that can be generally applied, but makes, say, the rogue's d6 sword better than her d6 hand crossbow in certain situations.

[I do this now with homebrew creatures and homebrew weapons. The Battlemaster specifically used his warhammer against the bludgeon-vulnerable kruthik-things, where he usually prefers his serrated (reroll 1s on damage) longsword...]
 

Whoops, I forgot this was a "one thing you'd add", and not a general discussion of THAC0 ;-P ... I mean of topics.

I would chime in with "weapon and armor distinctions" (breaking the wish rules by using "and"). As someone else said pages earlier, the PF2 weapon table makes every weapon slightly different; that's an easy place to start. I cannot stand that the only distinction between warhammer, longsword, and battleaxe (besides the picture) is the damage type... and after 3rd level, that hardly matters because everything after "skeleton" that resists damage resists all mundane types!

I want the fighter to look at the giant scorpion and think "should I use the axe, and try to chop off a leg or that stinger? Or should I use the spike on my warhammer to puncture that hard shell? The sword stays sheathed... it's of no use here!" I don't necessarily need the 1e "weapons vs. armor" table... no one memorizes all that, even for the own weapon (even when it was helpfully on the character sheet!) -- I'm looking for a minor flavorful/elegant distinction that can be generally applied, but makes, say, the rogue's d6 sword better than her d6 hand crossbow in certain situations.

[I do this now with homebrew creatures and homebrew weapons. The Battlemaster specifically used his warhammer against the bludgeon-vulnerable kruthik-things, where he usually prefers his serrated (reroll 1s on damage) longsword...]
I like this, magic weapon solve all resistance problem for martial.
Having more Resistance piercing weapon, or bludgeon or slashing would make martial pausing more various weapon.
 

rgoodbb

Adventurer
Muls. And of course the world that they populate along with preserving and defiling magic and deserts and cannibalistic Halflings and Sorcerer Kings and nasty monsters that you see on the left of this post etc.

That's 1 thing. Right? Muls.
 

Faolyn

Hero
The problem is - It's tough for me to imagine that a couple of 5e 6th level wizards could not wipe out a medieval-sized army.
I suddenly want a shield wall to be capable of reflecting fireballs, or at least minimizing damage.

I want the fighter to look at the giant scorpion and think "should I use the axe, and try to chop off a leg or that stinger? Or should I use the spike on my warhammer to puncture that hard shell? The sword stays sheathed... it's of no use here!" I don't necessarily need the 1e "weapons vs. armor" table... no one memorizes all that, even for the own weapon (even when it was helpfully on the character sheet!) -- I'm looking for a minor flavorful/elegant distinction that can be generally applied, but makes, say, the rogue's d6 sword better than her d6 hand crossbow in certain situations.
Possibilities:

The scorpion is resistant to slashing damage, whether it's magical or not.

The scorpion has +prof bonus to its AC against slashing weapons.

The scorpion takes a d4 less damage from slashing damage. (Or some other die.)

Any of these can be written into the monster's statblock.
 

rmcoen

Explorer
Possibilities:

The scorpion is resistant to slashing damage, whether it's magical or not.

The scorpion has +prof bonus to its AC against slashing weapons.

The scorpion takes a d4 less damage from slashing damage. (Or some other die.)

Any of these can be written into the monster's statblock.
I have done exactly that with specific monsters. I noted an example in one of these threads, somewhere. The party faced some chitinous bug things, and were having trouble (at 3rd level) hitting kruthik ACs of 16 and 18. Then they noted that the cleric's warhammer was hitting more frequently than their own blades and bows ["-2 AC vs. bludgeoning" house rule, specific to these bugs], so the battlemaster switched to his warhammer, and things went much more easily.

And I can keep doing exactly that, house ruling special features/weaknesses into all my encounters. From pure efficiency, that's one person doing extra work instead of five people (my players) remembering to add their weapon-based quirks. But I'd still prefer it if the system [hence this being the thing I'd add] said "bludgeoning weapons get +2 against Medium and Heavy Armor, or natural ACs of 14 or higher" or some such.
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top