Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Stalker0" data-source="post: 8308824" data-attributes="member: 5889">While there are innumerable details I might consider changing, there are a few philosophies I would want to adjust:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A focus on variable numbers of encounters</li> </ul>At the end of the day, this is my biggest philosophical beef with 5e....the notion that the balance of the game is principled around 6-8 encounters exclusively. That is very far away from the narratives I run in my games.Similar to healing variants, I really want some strong thought to adjusting the game to a more 2-3 encounter model.... even if it is just a variant section of the DMG. I want a series of changes to classes and monsters to better fit my style of gaming.<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A rework of concentration</li> </ul>I fully understand the reasons concentration exist, and they are good reasons. But mechanically, concentration remains a clunky mechanic. It can require lots of dice rolling, its very easy to forget if your not paying good attention....and it really limits the variety of spells I see in the game.My players really chafe under concentration, and its probably the number 1 thing they complain about.So I would like to go back to the drawing board here. Probably my number 1 thing is just split the two "types" of concentration into some other form. Currently there is the "we want this spell to be interruptible" and there is the "we want to limit stacking with this spell". Most spells don't need to be both, but by slamming both together in a single mechanic you create something that poorly serves both.<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The middle ground of money</li> </ul>I don't want to go back to 3e's magic item shop, but I also think 5e has so little reward for gold that my players joke about gaining "useless gold". there needs to be a middle ground, something players can spend money on that gives them tangible benefits....again we don't need full magic item power here....but something to make all that treasure worth something.<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">4e monster design</li> </ul>4e did a lot of wrong things, but monster design was not one of them...at least not by the later books. Monsters were interesting, with neat abilities. Further, the role system really helped the DM at a glance put together a competitive group against a party....because 4e recognized a fundamental dnd truth....it takes a party to beat a party.5e monsters are quite boring in comparison<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">An index worth a damn</li> </ul>I feel like the indexes have been getting worse with each new edition, I get that this is not sexy....but my lord are the indexes bad sometimes.</blockquote>

Verification