Your Favorite 5e Houserule

13th Age Mook rules work well. Because of the way bounded accuracy works you don't even need to have a special monster category.

This allows Fighters to wade through hordes of goblins at higher levels.



This gives a fairly good simulation of the 1e Fighter's ability to attack a number of 1hd monsters equal to their level. If the last part above bothers you just say the monster has to be within plausible range to take damage.
I might try that for when we have several kobolds/cultists surrounding us.
 
Spellcasting Ability Score variant: At character creation OR multiclassing, spellcasters (except wizards, INT only) can pick one of two spellcasting ability scores to cast from (ex. Sorcs can pick CHA or CON; Clerics and Paladins can pick CHA or WIS, Bards and Warlocks can pick CHA or INT). This just opens up different character concepts players may wish to play.

Point Buy with Feats: Characters are created with 27 point buy. A player can pay 4 points to start with a feat.

Flanking: a creature gets +1 to their attacks for each adjacent ally to a hostile creature. If a creature (up to size Large) is surrounded on 4 sides, each attacking creatures gets advantage.
If creatures are back-to-back with an ally, or put their back to a wall/object, they cannot be flanked or surrounded. Gives a little more tactical movement to melee combats and encourages moving around, while keeping the attack bonuses within BA.
If a creature is flanked and another PC gets within 5', that PC also gets advantage at my table. I really like your idea of adding a +1, though. Is that on top of advantage, or instead of advantage? I can see it working on top of advantage, because the more they are surrounded, the more perilous their situation is.
 

Weiley31

Adventurer
13th Age Mook rules work well. Because of the way bounded accuracy works you don't even need to have a special monster category.

This allows Fighters to wade through hordes of goblins at higher levels.



This gives a fairly good simulation of the 1e Fighter's ability to attack a number of 1hd monsters equal to their level. If the last part above bothers you just say the monster has to be within plausible range to take damage.
How does the 13th age Mook rules go? Sounds fun.
 

Weiley31

Adventurer
Oh I get it, the number of mooks is the hp of the group: so 14 goblin mooks would be 14 hp, and dealing 7 kills 7 of em.
 

Helldritch

Adventurer
You guys might be interested in this



Explanation is found here: How to F$%& CR: A Practical Example of Monster Building the Angry Way

(c) by AngryGM
Interesting article. A bit complicated at first glance but workable. I for my self, think that most "normal" that is non-solo monsters are fine. It is the boss/leaders/solo monsters that are a bit weak on the level that they should be. Why would a hobgoblin warlord go for a lower armor than his troops and no shield? It makes no sense. Why would a veteran be stuck in splint mail and no shield while he's fighting with a long sword? Hey! He fights with it as a two handed sword... why not use a two handed sword then... Better stick to plate and shield. The Veteran is now scarier. An AC 20 foe is much more threatening than a foe with an AC 17. I strongly practice the: "what the players have, the monster can too. What the monsters get, the players can get it too." but only when it comes to equipment.
 
Oh I get it, the number of mooks is the hp of the group: so 14 goblin mooks would be 14 hp, and dealing 7 kills 7 of em.
No. Not quite. That would be extreme carnage.

Say you have a group of 5 Goblins. They have 25 hit points total. For every 5 points damage you remove one goblin. So if three of the goblins are engaged with a fighter and he attacks one and rolls 12 damage you remove two goblins and remove 12 hp total from the group pool. If someone then does 3 hp to another goblin you will remove another one, even if it was nowhere near the Fighter at the time.

This means that theoretically a Figher can take out goblins that are nowhere near him with a single melee attack. You can simply overrule that if it makes no sense - but I usually handle it as a morale issue. The goblin at the other side of the room runs screaming when it sees what happens to its allies.
 

Helldritch

Adventurer
No. Not quite. That would be extreme carnage.

Say you have a group of 5 Goblins. They have 25 hit points total. For every 5 points damage you remove one goblin. So if three of the goblins are engaged with a fighter and he attacks one and rolls 12 damage you remove two goblins and remove 12 hp total from the group pool. If someone then does 3 hp to another goblin you will remove another one, even if it was nowhere near the Fighter at the time.
It's almost like a swarm... I fail to see the advantage of doing it this way but at the same time it can be very theatrical.
 
It's almost like a swarm... I fail to see the advantage of doing it this way but at the same time it can be very theatrical.
It just makes tracking easier. You don't need to worry about the exact hit points of every individual mook. You just need to know the thresholds at which you will remove one from play.

You still have action economy issues. There are a couple of ways you can handle this - you can lower mook damage. (Say to the minimum number of the die roll) or you can limit the number of attacks - so a group of five mooks may make only 3 attacks between them. (But if not attacking can be assumed to take the help action.)
 
Last edited:

Helldritch

Adventurer
It is better than I first thought. Might need some working at my table but I'll give it a shot with one of my group. Just to see how it works out in "real" life.
 
It is better than I first thought. Might need some working at my table but I'll give it a shot with one of my group. Just to see how it works out in "real" life.
I think I would keep track of individual HP still, but attach all the extra hits to the mob furthest from the group (and able to flee easiest). I also think that I would only do this for groups larger than the adventuring group. I also wouldn't necessarily tell my players, so that if it didn't make sense for somebody to flee a situation, they wouldn't wonder why the pool of enemies wasn't getting smaller.
 

dagger

Explorer
We have a few:

  1. Dual Weapon Feat - In addition to the other benefits, it also removes having to use a Bonus action for the off hand attack (still limited to one attack though).
  2. New Feat: Improved Concentration - allows the caster to concentrate on two spells at once.
  3. New Feat: Improved Attunement - allows the character to attune to 4 magic items.
  4. Multi-classing - Only allowed for story reasons, and downtime may be required.
I think that is it.
 
Last edited:
I think I would keep track of individual HP still, but attach all the extra hits to the mob furthest from the group (and able to flee easiest). I also think that I would only do this for groups larger than the adventuring group. I also wouldn't necessarily tell my players, so that if it didn't make sense for somebody to flee a situation, they wouldn't wonder why the pool of enemies wasn't getting smaller.
It's pretty easy to cap damage. If a Fighter is only next to two mooks than you can just say that the amount of damage necessary to kill two mooks is the maximum he is capable of doing with that attack.
 
Last edited:

Jediking

Explorer
If a creature is flanked and another PC gets within 5', that PC also gets advantage at my table. I really like your idea of adding a +1, though. Is that on top of advantage, or instead of advantage? I can see it working on top of advantage, because the more they are surrounded, the more perilous their situation is.
It is instead of advantage, only one or the other (either +bonus OR advantage) will apply unless additional bonuses or circumstances outside of flanking/surrounding are involved.
So from your example, both flanking creatures would have +1 to their attacks. If one more joined them, all three attackers would have +2 to attacks. If two more allies join and surround the hostile creature (four attackers total, one on each side), then all four attackers would have advantage.

Positioning does matter, as being Surrounded (ALL attackers have advantage) only applies when a creature has at least one hostile creature on each of it’s four sides. If four attackers strike at a creature but no one is directly behind it, then they would have +3 to melee attack rolls. We use minis for most big encounters so it is easy to call and rule during combats.

I tried the optional Flanking rule found in the PHB but found advantage to be given out too often and resulting in enemies getting downed too quickly (the DMG Flanking has been discussed elsewhere, so this was just my repeated experience).

I’ve been using this which really helps groups of weaker monsters or minions to still remain a viable threat, especially for BBEGs, and also see some classes make more dynamic choices in their combat style (especially our current Monk and Bard who both now jump in and out of melee combat, rather than do the same strategy for every encounter)
 

Nebulous

Hero
Flanking does +1 damage in my games if you hit. Advantage was just way TOO good, and is the default way 5e tries to fix everything. They're scared of small numbers, as if it will snowball into 3e again.
 

Advertisement

Top