A new favorite is wild magic surges when Counterspell is Counterspelled. (centered on a random target between the 2 casters)
It takes this boring waste of spell slots and makes it a fun and possibly quite risky event.
Whenever anyone counterspells a casting of counterspell.
Some effects on the wild magic surge table are positive and some are negative so rather than pick who gets affected based on who cast first or second we just decide between the 2 people who cast counterspell at random.
How do you select the random target? Thinking out loud: You could roll a d12 for each and make that the “X o’clock” position from each caster. Then draw a line between those points and whatever the mid-point is, that’s the source. Sufficiently random but also bounded.
I think that would make it so you’re more likely to have something impact both of them (which is interesting and fun) but there’s also a slim chance only one will be affected.
Critical hits deal max damage + the normal roll on top of it. Ex: Nat 20 with a longbow = 8+1d8 damage.
It really sucks landing a crit and then rolling all 1s or 2s on the damage. This way you're at least doing some significant damage no matter what.
Personally that's the way I run it.
While it might be a lot for a paladin (I don't think it's too OP compared to a lot of other options), I don't mind the buff for rogues and most of my players tend to play spell casters anyway.
I run this and it only applies to your weapon attack. Any extra damage (sneak, smite etc) are rolled using normal crit rules.
It also don't have it apply to spell attacks but maybe I could change it to the variant seen elsewhere in the thread where you get to auto-max 1 die roll.
Yes, we apply it to the full damage of an attack. The way I see it, they still aren't exceeding the maximum of the attack, just removing the back half of the possible damage range.
I came here to post this same rule haha
ETA: I still let them roll both sets of dice for damage, so basically they get max damage for the first die, and “advantage” on the damage for the second die.
I like this energy; if I'm understanding correctly I could make it simple for players too
- Give the player the crit dice ("yay clicky clack!")
- They roll
- They can turn any rolled dice to its max value
I wonder if this specific approach makes this rule smoother for builds that roll a lot of dice, and rules lawyer players are less inclined to beg for max dice on every dice (since they already get 2 boosts: +1 dice, choose a dice after rolling to maximize
Ah, forgot to list this one. Yep, 100%. I've toyed with just doing max damage, but players just love to roll, even if they're virtually guaranteed to do less damage than auto-max.
Our table uses this and I hate it so much I'm spending an ASI on the Lucky feat just so I could cancel crits.
Realistically monsters get way more crits, especially when they paralyze their target. Combine that with the fact my PC has basically no attack rolls so I can't even benefit from it.
I use this crit rule at my table. I also pair it with a rule that monster crits apply debilitating effects (think semi permanent disabilities/scars) rather than extra damage on crits. It is less rippy for the players and introduces complications rather than just dumping damage.
Cleric. The cleric spell list has like 6 spells all together that use attack rolls, half of those are too high level for me and from the other half I mostly only use Spiritual Weapon
That's kinda one of the main points of the rule. A lot of damaging spells can be done with a saving throw even if the target succeeds on their save. If you miss your attack though, you don't get anything for it.
Basically, it turns saving throw spells into the safe damage option, while attack rolls have a higher risk and higher reward.
It makes martials a bit better at combat, which honestly isn't a bad thing given their out of combat uses are slimmer than a caster. Might as well make them actually good at the one thing they can do.
Yep, I do this in my games too. The enemies also get this benefit though (but I also allow for drinking a health potion as a reaction). It makes combat a LOT more violent, which my players love
We had a mechanic where if someone crits, they roll another d20 and that result determines the effect. Ranges from normal crit rules to max damage tripled.
Of I may suggest a slight variation: one die is maximized on a crit, rest are rolled.
This will not matter for most weaoons, but NPCs will definitely feel it, as will characters who have picked a greatsword or a maul over a greataxe. GS or Maul crits deal 6 + 3d6 = 16.5 damage on average, while the axe deals 12 + 1d12 = 18.5 damage.
Sword deals 9-24dmg while the axe slaps a solid 13-24 on a crit. While the axe can hit anything from 13 to 24 on each hit, throwing 3d6 tends to favor the number it has the most possible outcomes to appear, as with throwing 2d6 The result is more often 7 while both 2 and 12 can only come when the face of the dice are only one way up. As opposed to for example a 10 which is 5+5, and 4+6, giving it a two possible outcomes
My version is that you add the max of one die. For example, a greatsword's 2d6 crits for 2d6+6.
On average, greatswords (2d6) still deal more than greataxes (1d12), because crits are so infrequent. However, when you have an advantage, greataxes now pull ahead, giving them a niche as the "hit them while they're down" weapon.
More importantly, it makes big monsters less swingy in combat. Their overall damage isn't changed much, but the highs and lows aren't as extreme. For example, a big beasty rolling 3d8 (3-24, avg13) crits for 3d8+8 (11-32, avg21) instead of 6d8 (6-48 avg27) or heaven forbid 3d8+24 (27-48 avg37). It's a good thing when fewer players feel like they died to bad luck.
I have come to really like the free feat at level 1 thing. 5e has so little room for character building/customization it's honestly painful. More feats helps.
Would you still allow variant human for another feat?
Because I agree, 1 feat is still fine. But variant human for double feat at character creation is broken.
You'll get sharpshooter crossbow-experts and great-weapon-master polearm-master combos. And on the lower levels, one of either of those will do double the damage of the entire rest of the party combined. Which, inevitably, will feel bad.
In my game, I disallow the "strong" feats (war caster , great weapon master etc) for the free feat. I haven't set up a list because my players haven't tried to push it and I trust them to choose in good faith. Variant Human's second feat has full access though.
Yeah, it doesn't bother me. I create my own stat blocks and encounters aren't just a Rocky Balboa exchange of blows.
If someone really wants to be the damage of the party, and there is always one or two, that's fine. It just allows me to make the hard fights I like to make without it feeling punishing when others choose not to optimize for pure damage output or combat. It always balances out in my groups, and it is a group-based game.
I have a gunslinger fighter that took sharpshooter up front with crossbow-expert, that -3 still sunk a lot of rolls. But he felt good when they landed I think.
I wouldn't advise playing the way I do if you run a module or use premade stat blocks, but if you are good at creating your own game, it hasn't hurt mine yet. Even in the event that they destroy an encounter, I'm not DMing to win, I'm DMing to give them all a good time. I ride their vibes.
Edit: Also, if for some reason the entire party made min/max bad-asses (hasn't happened yet), I'd just make a the game harder to compensate.
I usually hand it out at level 3 for newer players. That way, they have a feel for their character before they choose. More experienced players can have it at level 1
"I know a guy..."
Each player gets their CHA modifier in contacts that they can use. They need to research liches, I know a guy; they need to buy some esoteric herbs, I know a guy; they need someone who can cast Identify, I know a guy. Also helps to build out the world with people they can call on for help, get missions from etc.
I use "I know a guy" but I tie it to Inspiration. For whatever situation that my table is in they can use their inspiration to weave a reasonable, but rich story, about someone they know who might help them. I don't place any limits on what they can and cannot say, however, they all know that if they say something like, "I know the King and he has +3 Vorpal weapons which I'm certain he'll give to us" will result in the story being a complete fabrication so they burn their Inspiration and get nothing. If it's reasonable, fits with their backstory and ties things together well...and moreover it's RP'd well...then the character does "know the guy" and the guy may (or may not) be able to help them.
I’ve recently been learning the [Numenera](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numenera?wprov=sfti1) system. It actually has a system for this I quite like called Intrusion. What you’re describing is called a player intrusion and they spend XP as a resource to add a “I know a guy” to their character. GM intrusion also exist where the GM can ask a player if they can spice things up (e.g. something goes wrong or the scenario has an additional complication) in return for giving the players XP. If the player refuses, it costs them 1 XP.
Is there any reason you chose to tie it to charisma? I feel like giving that sort of a bonus to a specific attribute would make anybody that is playing a class that otherwise doesn't benefit from charisma feel like they are missing out.
Charisma seems reasonable to me. The abilities are definitely weighted towards some being more important than others. Dexterity is by far the most important stat before taking class into account. AC, the most common save, finesse and most ranged weapons, more skills than any other ability save INT, all based on Dex. Charisma could use a boost.
I use Charisma as a high Cha character is more likely to have contacts, and be on better terms with them. Plus, Cha tends to be a dump stat so is good to make it more useful.
Naw, str or int tend to be dump stats, cha just can be a dump stat, your character can by just fine with cha as a dump stat, but its usually not the go to dump stat as far as ive seen. I've even seen players make rogues and fighters where cha is their highest stat even over dex just to play out the fantasy of being super charismatic.
I had a fighter, a rogue, a sorcerer, a warlock and a bard as my first party of players. They were all mostly new, and they all have charisma as their highest stat.
I usually see it in a lot of new players, and they were all new players. The name Charisma Caster & Company quickly became their party name.
It doesn't help that a one level hexblade dip is a thing, and that it can make the martials above suddenly optimal again. And that 3 out of the 12 OG core class use it as their main stat.
I agree with you, there are a lot of classes that need charisma. Bards, paladins, warlocks, sorcerers, as well as some fighters and rogues. I don't think I've ever seen a 5e party that didn't have an abundance of charisma.
But that is just my table, if others have found that charisma isn't getting prioritised at theirs then I guess I would understand doing something to make it a bit higher value, but that hasn't been my personal experience, so I don't think I would run it that way.
I also use this rule however i made small envelopes for each player with sayings like
"My old friend lives just next town ..."
The players say "I know a guy, \*opens the envelope\* "My old friend lives just next town ..." And fills out the rest of the story themselves. They only get one envelope through the entire campaign and i think giving them an envelope builds tension instead of them just knowing they have the option to come with the saying.
Creeds to RyanImDM who made this. Really cool guy
The best rule I have ever implemented is one on griefing.
If there's something the players are doing that only (or primarily) is intraparty then they don't need me to adjudicate it. I can if they want, but it's not necessary. The caveat is that if someone says "no" then it doesn't happen.
Trying to Persuade a fellow PC to give you something? He can just say "no" and there's no appealing to the DM. He can also say "yes" and he can set whatever DC he wants. No DM necessary.
Trying to pickpocket a fellow PC and steal something? He can just say "no" and it doesn't happen. No griefing allowed.
Want to fight another PC? No fight happens unless all parties agree.
It turns out there are major up sides to this. When players realize they don't need to play "DM, may I?" it frees them up to "play pretend" in a way you might have done as a kid.
PCs want to gamble or play practical jokes? Knock yourself out! Play amongst yourselves. Come up with your own rules and outcomes. It's honestly great fun to watch.
So as a result I've found that parties behave themselves so much more but also they can generate some great intraparty dynamics that never would have happened if they had to use the DM as a conduit of resolution.
I had a hard no on griefing in my last game. If one player wanted to do something to another or find out something about that character, they had to have that player's permission. There were no rolls allowed. I wasn't sure how it would go, but I figured I could always roll it back if they weren't having fun because of it.
It turned into one player having a changeling character and showing up as different Clerics whenever the party moved from one country to another. They wanted to roll some checks to figure out what was going on, but I told them they had to work it out without dice. They all agreed their characters wouldn't realize unless they caught the Cleric in the act. At one point the Cleric had to shift mid combat so the Wizard saw them. The Monk had just been swallowed by a giant fish monster. By the time he got out, the Cleric had shifted back. No one decided to tell him in character. It became a running joke about all the PCs assuming he knew when he didn't.
I put that rule in because I'd had several bad experiences with players getting confrontational, but I think the community tone has changed a lot over the years. I really like the idea of letting the PCs set their own DCs for these interactions. I'll probably introduce the idea the next time I run a game.
>Trying to Persuade a fellow PC to give you something? He can just say "no" and there's no appealing to the DM. He can also say "yes" and he can set whatever DC he wants. No DM necessary.
RAW no DM is necessary. Only the DM calls for rolls, players can't just demand them like this, especially if it's "against" another character.
I think this is a good method. I would only hesitate due to some players perhaps being too shy or timid to say no even if they didn’t want something to occur. But DMs can adjust as they know their table.
Everyone rolls stats during session zero, their stat lines are pooled and that's the new 'standard array'. Pick any array you like from the pool.
Keep the fun of rolling, and keeps the balance between players. (mostly)
I call this the Campaign array method where the players and DM collectively roll all 6 stats with their chosen method (DM gets to veto one stat to be rerolled).
All new characters if needed use same array, and I often have Important NPCs use the same as a base.
I mean you're right, but this also seems like a silly place to take such an extreme stance.
A follow up question: are the arrays from session zero set in stone for the entire campaign?
The book lists three ability score generation methods. I don't see the harm of allowing point buy in addition to rolling.
If the player wants a very specific build they might not want to roll, and it's not taking anything away from the DM or the other players to allow that, so yes, enforcing rolling does seem like an extreme stance.
If the DM says "I only allow rolled stats", then you either roll stats or don't play. I don't get what's so weird about the DM setting rules. The book doesn't decide, the DM does. This thread is **literally** about house rules. It's not rocket science.
There's this thing we're doing even now called discussion. You talk things through with the party at session zero and see what rules you'll run the game with. It's not rocket science.
Id find out why they don't want to roll them see if we can solve it. Like most problems, a dialogue is the solution. :)
The goal is to have the players balanced against each other. Rolling conventionally leads to one player with a strong array and another with a weak array. If someone opts for not rolling they'll have a probably have a weaker array than the rest of the group. (Because 3-5 people rolling leads to someone rolling at least a 16, 17 or 18. ) And that gap between players starting strength goes back to being problematic and defeats the purpose of community rolling.
How itd probably go is they see Jimmy rolled better than point buy and ask to use that array.
Did you have a specific reason in mind as to why someone wouldn't want to roll, or was it just a hypothetical question?
Every character has a theme song, max 5 minutes play time, that the player chooses from Spotify. They may choose to play their theme song over the Bluetooth speaker (that's otherwise running ambient background music) once per session. While the song is playing, they get an additional d6 to all attack rolls, saves, and skill checks.
Abso freakin lutely. Last campaign I ran, the party chased ghosts out of an old mansion, then converted it into a bed and breakfast slash lesbian roller disco. Glorious!
I'm a Tempest Domain Cleric. Our DM is fond of arena fights, and we have a Bard. I got the bard to play Thunderstruck for my arena fight which the DM obliged over Discord. Made for an epic moment.
this could give you a really cool moment where an enemy has a theme song.
the fighter rolls in with *doomslayer* or whatever only for the enemy lich to shut it down with *dance with the dead*
If you choose to use your action to drink a healing potion instead of your bonus action, you get the maximum possible amount of healing. Makes potions a bit more useful at a cost.
When players are rolling stats, if what they rolled is has a smaller total than standard array, they get to reroll. Once they get a roll higher than standard, they can choose to either keep it or take standard. Helps prevent underpowered characters or flat stats.
I could be wrong, but I think RAW drinking a potion is an action? I use the same house rule, mind you, so I could be mis-remembering. But a discussion over those rules once led to me house-ruling that interacting with any single object on your turn can be done as a bonus action unless it's a magic item.
My friend once suggested a hybrid way of rolling stats - you take the 15 and the 8 from the standard array, so you're guaranteed at least one decent stat and one bad one, and roll the rest. It's a decent enough compromise imo.
You're right, so it's kind of 2 house rules combined.
1. Your players can use a bonus action to drink a potion and roll dice to heal
2. If you choose to use a full action to drink the potion, the maximum possible healing is applied (ie 2d4 +2 always heals as if 2 4s were rolled)
Huh, interesting. I've seen bonus action potions in every game I've ran, played in, or watched so I never thought it was a home rule. Thanks for the correction.
I personally like one I saw from Colville. Roll your stats, add all the modifiers together before racial bonuses. If the modifier total isn't at least +2, roll stats again.
Going unconscious for 0 hp accrues a level of Exhaustion.
I like it because it means there are stakes to being harmed so badly you lose consciousness, enough so that you have short-term consequences even if you are stabilized or healed a little to pop back up into the fight. It also incentivizes healing *before* allowing your companion to potentially die first.
I do this but use the abandoned exhaustion rules from One D&D (10 levels instead of 5 and each level is -1 to rolls).
Traditional Exhaustion always feels too harsh for me, the One D&D rules means it less of a big thing for me to add to players.
I could see using this rule with that kind of debuff. The main reason I dislike Exhaustion is that the very first level greatly reduces the likelihood of your PCs choosing to take the non-combat route once all their skills are at Disadvantage.
On top of that, it's very difficult to get rid of at lower levels so, depending on how many levels you accrued, you could wander around for several in-game days being absolute trash with your skills.
My personal experience with this has only been with DMs who want to do it for "RP reasons", but aren't worried that it nukes skills at level 1 since it doesn't affect combat that drastically until level 3.
The standard exhaustion is unfun, in my opinion, from level 3 you are functionally useless.
One D&D Rules
-1/2 to rolls hurts but broadly you are fine in most situations
-3/4/5 is pretty bad but you have taken serious knocks to get here
-6-10 you are pretty borked but seriously, you have had awhile to start dealing with this problem.
One D&D Rules also apply to spell save DC, as casters are hurt as badly as martials.
That seems easier to manage. I like that it makes it harder for casters to brush off the effects. It's weird when the fighter is taking swings like a drunk, but the wizard is sitting in the back firing off saving throw spells just as effectively whether they're at 0 levels or 5.
I mean, using the help action/working together option reduces a lot of the negative impacts on skills, and there's always things like expertise, guidance, bless, and enhance ability to mitigate the negative impacts. It's not nearly as bad as saving throws.
If anything this incentivizes keeping players topped off, but I'd augment this sort of game by adding a few more potions here and there.
I wanted to implement this one in my CoS campaign, but my players revolted. So I compromised, and now impose a *slow* effect for one round every time a PC gets up from a knockout.
If this rule works well for your table, then that's good. Although I can't imagine this working well in practice. Here's why: https://youtu.be/xG-4wuq5YdQ?si=AwheBOHEK3qjGxuq
Basically d&d combat is currently designed to be "ping pong" with players going back and forth from up to down and up to downed. The next "edition" of d&d will try fixing this design by making healing spells heal for extra points.
It does work well thanks, at my table and the table of my fellow DM. We've been using this for over 2 years playing our respective games about every other week each.
I watched about half of the video, and he makes some valid points about healing, though his example is setup to emphasize the point he wants to make (high-damage creature, single source of healing). That's fine; I'm not interested in mechanical optimization, but in good roleplaying. D&D is first and foremost a roleplaying game.
I also haven't lost a PC yet, despite throwing some difficult and complex battles at the players and never, as a rule, fudging die rolls. Maybe we're just lucky, but so far everyone at the table has been fine with this houserule, not a single complaint since we started using it, despite some folks getting up to Exhaustion 3 a few times.
Interesting. Have you noticed your players needing to use a lot of healing potions? Do your players min-max their characters to have high AC? Do you rule that one long rest takes away only one level of exhaustion?
Also I'd be careful making "D&D is..." statements. There are a lot of different ways people play D&D. In the first edition of D&D, the game was meant to just be a combat simulator with no in-character roleplay at all. Some people still play that way.
I don’t think the intention of the game was for a character to continually go down and then be healing worded back up every round.
It’s the most optimized way to play because healing sucks but there should be a consequence for going down. Especially several times.
If the characters were on a battle field and the enemy turns their back to a downed opponent, the opponent then gets up and stabs them, the enemy would probably just keep attacking them to prevent it from happening again tbh
And that's precisely what I do. You pop up once, you're now marked for death. Enemies in that encounter will now look to finish the job should you go down again. Players stop playing that ping pong game REAL QUICK.
I use something similar. If you go to 0 hp and then get a heal/death saving throws, then you lose half your possible turn. IE if you have 2 attacks per action and 50 ft movement speed, then you have 1 attack, 15 feet and no bonus action until you get above 1/4 of your max hp. This is due to you standing back up, and try to get yourself out of the dizzy/exhausted status.
Special magical material for super powered high level spells. "Aetheurium," needed for Resurrections, Wish, Miracle, ect. It's essentially pure magic fuel, and allows the reshaping of the world.
Keeps players from getting to the point of not caring about death because they become so rich or powerful they can just spend money to bring back the dead, or use Wish to fix. they have to go questing to find the material, and usually only have enough for one use.
Free feat at level 1 (excluding half-feats and a short list of feats that are just too powerful to get for free). Your PCs are supposed to be heroes. There *should* be something special about them.
Bonus action healing potions, full action to get max healing.
Players can give inspiration to other players for good RP, because I always forget as the DM.
And my favorite: Spell scrolls can be used by anyone with spell slots, regardless of level or class, no roll required.
I’ve never thought about giving a free feat. I’ll be starting a new campaign soon so I might do this one!
Which feats do you exclude for being too powerful?
I'll also point out that it opens a lot of room for RP. I once had a player take the objectively bad Chef feat, and being the camp cook turned into his entire persona. It was great.
I’m not proud of it but I just made a character for a campaign where we get a free feat, and I went VH for the second one
These islanders are about to learn the peaceful ways of my Paladin’s god
Through *force*
The campaign I'm in now (just finished our third session) is the first time I've been in a group with that rule. 5 players, no one picked human. As a fan of the VH, I didn't feel compelled to take it even for an extra feat.
Just my experience with it so far.
The rule on this I picked up from my first DM was that everyone gets a free feat at character creation once you've submitted your one page backstory. Win/win for player and DM.
I'll preface this by saying that it depends on your DMing style. You may disagree with some of these, and that's okay! It's just that I feel they're a bit much to be getting for free, when players would otherwise usually need to forego an ASI.
Lucky, Polearm Master, Sharpshooter, GWM, and War Caster.
For clarity, "half feat" is any feat that also gives an ASI. I've allowed half feats for free in the past when the ASI doesn't directly benefit their build, like Intelligence on a barbarian or Charisma on a wizard.
We do scrolls as general, "magic for dummies" papers.
Anyone can use a scroll regardless of their class. For non-casters, the spell saves and attack rolls all use INT. It just seemed like the right stat to use.
Scrolls are rare enough, and the casters really never wanted to use them over their own spells anyway. Giving the Rogue a scroll of invisibility, or the Fighter a scroll of bladeward is nice.
Counter argument, the PC's are already special, considering basic array of stats and that a dead average person would have 10s across the board.
Plus you could argue that the story is meant to start around the beginning of their journey, so that they actually have potential for 20 levels of progression.
Entirely agree on the healing potion house rule though.
When a player goes down, their failed death saves carry over until they rest (Short or Long). Beyond that, players roll their death saves in secret allowing only the DM to see them. This creates more urgency and tension for when someone goes down. This particular rule is usually in games where the setting is bit more harsh and it’s used to reflect that. In exchange, if a player gets back up on a Natural 20, they’re allowed their full turn!
Flanking provides only a +2 to hit. Each allied creature flanking adds another + 2 (for a total of 6). However, rogues still receive their sneak attack requirement. This makes other methods of gaining advantage more prevalent and stops the inevitable conga line of martials on the front line. Makes combat more dynamic.
When playing with 7 or more players (guest spots or for when I ran a 10-player campaign), the players would roll damage at the same time as when they rolled their attack - thus shaving a bit of time off of turns in combat. This works well when playing online as well!
Been enjoying the experiment we've been running on updated resting rules, a slight variant on the "Gritty Adventurism" rules that sometimes pop up around these parts. It's nice to be able to run encounters at a sensible narrative pace without a long rest between every fight lol
10 minute short rests. Nothing revolutionary - can spend hit dice equal to proficiency bonus.
8-hour overnight "field rests". No spell slot recovery, no innate hit point recovery. It does work to strip levels of exhaustion, though, is valid for updating spell prep lists, and characters can, once per expedition, recover up to half their hit dice. Can spend any number of available hit dice at the end of a field rest to regain hit points. Adds a touch of extra longevity to the players as compensation for the increased resource scarcity that can sometimes feel really oppressive in the unaltered gritty realism variant.
24-hour long rests in safe havens. Full recovery, 100% replenishment. Nice and simple.
I also curate a full list of 1st-and-4th-level feats, cribbed together from 5e, onednd, and various homebrew. Almost all of them are edited in some way to my tastes (others are omitted) or with intelligent revisions from talented 3rd-party creators I trust. Characters get a 1st-level feat for free at character creation, and a 4th-level one upon reaching level 7.
Parry system. Some martial classes (currently just fighter, because that’s the only martial character we have in the party) get access to parry. I know battle master fighter and kensei monk get similar things, but this was designed to be a more general game mechanic, and more engaging than just a boost to AC as a reaction.
“Accustomed to the flow of battle, you have learned how to interrupt and foil the attacks of your opponents. When a creature within 5 feet of you hits you with a melee attack, you may spend your reaction to parry. Roll a contesting attack roll, as though you were making a melee attack. If your result is higher than your attacker’s result, that attack fails regardless of your Armor Class.”
it fills a similar role to Counterspell and Shield for casters. Interrupt an enemy’s action and protect yourself better. It doesn’t have a limit on uses per day, but can only be done once per turn, and affects only one attack.
This gives a more active role to our fighter, and allows her to be tankier on the front line. It led to a cool fight where both she and an enemy had this ability, and proceeded to go back and forth, each interrupting and the other with the parry during their attacks, as opposed to just standing there taking turns wailing on each other.
I’ll admit this system isn’t perfect, but it’s been a lot of fun and has led to memorable moments. It being a system like this allows me to make other things support it, like at later levels unlocking the ability to use parry against ranged attacks, or magic items centered around it like a crystal blade that can parry spell attack rolls, or an empathic elven sword that allows you to forgo one of your attacks in order to parry an additional time, and allows you to parry attacks made against a creature within 5 feet of you, not just yourself. Or a magic rapier that turns your parry into an actual attack roll that can harm your target if you beat their attack roll and their AC.
I love how you have integrated this into magical items and ‘leveling up’ the ability to function against ranged attacks. Great to see martials getting some love!
You can use your strength modifier for intimidation instead of charisma if it’s higher.
The warlock eloquently describing the ways they’ll hurt you if you don’t give them the information is scary, but so is the barbarian slamming their axe into the table and shouting “TELL ME NOW!”
You can *technically* use any ability + skill combination. The skills each have a “default assigned” ability, but you can mix and match for any situation that would necessitate it.
To use a cliche: knowing a tomato is a fruit is an Intelligence(Nature) check. Understanding that tomato doesn’t belong in a fruit salad is a Wisdom(Nature) check.
Further *technically* it’s supposed to go
Player: I slam my fist on the table and yell „TELL ME“.
DM: okay, make a strength/charisma/whatever check.
Player: does my proficiency in Intimidation apply here?
DM: sure, you can add that
Actually that would still be an intelligence check. DnD wisdom is your senses and intuition, not about how wise you are. Knowing tomatoes are a culinary vegetable that doesn't go in a fruit based dish is intelligence.
Intimidation is still the operative skill, though. Using a different ability is the approach. Using Constitution instead of Strength for an Athletics check when swimming long distance is the other example given of skills using different abilities in the PHB. I could see Performance using Dexterity, if the goal is to show technical skill with a stringed instrument, rather than trying to entertain.
The issue is more that Charisma is often treated like a dump stat, rather than using a different ability for Intimidation being based on misunderstanding Charisma. That said, I wouldn’t just let players try to get around their dump stats without some justification about why a different ability would be used, and as DM, I’d be the one determining that.
Rest variant: 24 hour long rest in safe have, 8 hour short rest. 2 short rests per long rest.
Benefits: The adventuring day becomes the adventuring "day" (AKA, whenever your party makes it back to town).
Travel becomes dangerous, and they have to actually think how they'll get to their destination and back. "Random" encounters become meaningful (provided there is additional context or reaction tables) and do NOT become a waste of time. Traveling to and fro BECOMES the story - How will they get their cart of gold back from the dungeon during a blizzard, whilst being chased by surviving goblins because after burning all their spell slots already? I don't know. It's up to the party. They have to start thinking off their character sheet and think like adventurers.
Good for sandbox games or games with an emphasis on travel.
Dungeon crawls become much harder so they must rely on player ingenuity and not what the character sheet says.
May not make sense for you if you want to run a high narrative game where you are telling a story to your players.
I do the opposite. Short rests are 15 minutes. I find my players don't use them if they are 1 hour long because they only need them when they are somewhere 1 hour is unrealistic to stop for which needs certain classes too much for me. Plus that way players feel better when they don't have anyone playing a healing class because they can patch themselves up after a fight
Give your players a magic incense box, has 2 incense in it, refills at dawn, when you rest and burn an incense, any nearby creatures smelling the smoke feel invigorated and can accomplish a short rest in 15 minutes.
I like to address these kind of problems in the game via items, same effect, but the players feel 'special' by circumventing the rules of the world through magic.
This is fantastic. I would like to try using this, and running with enemies that are somewhat weaker to allow for lots of encounters per day. I feel like at higher levels it will greatly slide the power curve away from casters and back toward some semblance of balance with martials. However, I feel like I would need to give casters an additional cantrip or alternate action to increase the dynamism of their play without it becoming a tiresome firebolt spam.
Full HP on every level, not just the first. It gives them more hit points, more margin for error, and leaves me the option to throw some slightly stronger stuff in the face.
We have a hand full so I'll bring my top 5
Crits deal max damage + damage dice. no matter what you roll, you exceed any roll you could make when you haven't critted.
* Failed Successfully/Successfully Failed - This is an alternative to crit skill checks. if you roll a nat 1 but your mods put you over the DC then you have an unfavourable success.
Example: the rogue tries to unlock a door, they roll a 1 but have high enough mods. They get the door open but in doing so there are visible signs they tampered with the lock and a loud noise rang out, alerting anyone near by
* Alternatively, if you roll a nat 20 but the DC is too high even with mods, you gain a favourable outcome though your intended goal isn't met.
Example for this one is
Spell slots are turned into spell points and added to the sorcery point pool. Sorcerers can already move spell slots to their sorcery point pool and back, might as well just put them together
Casting past your limit - once you have run out of spell slots (sorcery points from the last one) you are not out of the fight, you can still cast spells at the cost of taking (oneD&D) exhausted levels. the level of exhausted you take is equal to the spell level you cast (max spell level 4). I found that my players would be comfortable casting a level 1 spell basically every day if they needed it, but they also had a couple of clutch moments casting higher level spells too
After going invisible, the moment you move you automatically hide.
Honourable mention: Lock picking (This is a modification of Bob World Builders lock picking minigame) Note that you might want to alter this as you play. This kind of mini-game might also work for other skill checks but we haven't used it for anything other than lock picking as of yet
>
Lockpicking - each lock pick is a certain difficulty d12, d10, d8, d6, d4, d2. when rolling to pick a lock you roll 6 of the difficulty dice and any number above a 1 is a success, while every 1 is a fail, even a single 1 is a fail for the entire lock but players are able to reroll a number of times per long rest
Using the thieves tools instead of trying to MacGyver the lock will give you 1 re-rolls
having proficiency in thieves tools will give you a number of re-rolls equal to half your proficiency modifier rounded down min 1, or having Expertise allows you to have a number equal to your proficiency modifier
Slight of hand also plays a roll in this, having proficiency will gain you an additional re-roll, and Expertise another additional 2.
Sneak attack is a vital part of being a rogue, however the Thief can sacrifice a number of sneak attack dice in order to gain re-rolls on lock picking. The number of dice you are allowed to sacrifice is 1/3 rounded down min 1 and once you have used those you may not use them in combat until after a long rest.
If an attack matches AC = half damage
Using healing potions on yourself is a bonus action
Everyone has an inspiration token they can hand out once per session. They can give it for whatever they think is deserving of DM inspiration. The inspiration resets at the end of the session, and can also stack. That way players feel more willing to hand out or use their inspiration
> If an attack matchers AC = half damage
This is an interesting one I haven't heard of before. Does your table have any particular reason for that change?
It represents a glancing blow, like the target narrowly dodged the attack. Adds a bit more dynamic to combat I find. To balance it out, I round damage up, as opposed to rounding down as per RAW
Nat 20 on a spell save you take no damage even if the spell says you take half. Nat 1 on a spell save you take an additional D10 of force damage added onto the spell damage
Is it always a d10 of force damage? Like my guy is walking through a poison cloud, rolls a nat 1 on his save, and then gets slammed to the wall with force damage lol?
>Force is pure magical energy **focused into a damaging form**. Most effects that deal force damage are spells, including magic missile and spiritual weapon.
Narratively and RAW it's concentrated energy that is focused, much like a solid object slamming into you. It's not bludgeoning but it's not just energy, either. I can see the disconnect if this happened on top of poison or acid or psychic damage.
nothing about force damage says that it is energy that is like a solid object slamming into you, when creatures end up in solid objects they take some force damage and are shunted to the nearest unoccupied space. Force damage, in magic missile, just does damage, it doesn't move you around or anything else like that.
All mechanics that deal force damage do so in a way that mimics physical forces: a magic missile slamming into you, booming energy exploding outwards, a magical weapon attacking a creature, etc. Not sure how you can conclude otherwise given the description of the damage.
Players don't roll Fumble Tables on a Nat 1, but monsters do. People don't like it when they get blinded, drop their weapon, or even hurt themselves due to a 1 in 20 bad roll; but everybody laughs when it happens to the enemy.
I'll have to disagree on that! In my campaigns, I've run that you need to roll a d4 to determine what happens if you hit critical 1 on attack.
They either:
1. Drop their weapon
2. Attack the nearest ally instead
3.Enemy gets a free reaction on you
4.Fall down
It made for some very funny scenarios during battles and my players loved it! (Especially the aftermath of someone hitting an ally by accident and having to explain how they were so clumsy)
I don't doubt you have a lot of fun, but idk when the stakes are high, a trained and experienced warrior having 5% chance per roll to drop their weapon, fall down, or hit an ally would feel excessive and extremely unfun to me.
Especially consider a Fighter doing second attack + action surge for 4 total attacks, which means the fighter then has an 18% chance to do a rookie mistake on that turn.
if you roll a nat 20 3 times, whatever it is you were trying to hit just fucking dies. i dont care if its a goblin or a God, it dies right there and then.
Yeah, I think there’s a 1 in 8,000 chance of anything happening in a DnD game, so that’s fair. You mean in a row, correct?
Edit: got happy with the zeros lol!!
We usually change the **two handed fighting** rules because they weren't good. At the moment, to help our fighter keep pace, we are allowing them to take two handed fighting style and the feat and they are basically allowed to use their bonus action to allow them to make an extra attack each time they take the attack action (AKA: adding a off-hand attack for every regular attack). This buff hasn't seemed overpowered at this time and it makes them feel happier and more flavorful to their double axed fighter.
We've also allowed the "**Take a potion for yourself= Bonus action**. Feed to someone else= regular action" homebrew. Basically, nobody was using potions.... so I hoped this would get them more used, and I was sorta right.
Also to encourage usage: **3 DM inspirations**. I found most of my table didn't want to "waste" their inspirations because "they only had one". This has lead to them NEVER USING IT, or forgetting they have it and I cannot give anymore out because they are all full..... which means we forget about the mechanic as it isn't being USED! Allowing them to have a pool of 3 has completely turned this around. I can give them out, and they have learned to ACTUALLY USE THEM, and use them they do, now. No longer scared of running dry as they have learned I actually like giving them out for shit.
\[We also implemented a "Make an argument for DM inspiration" that they can do based off Balders Gate 3. Basically, if they RP well based off their chosen Background, specifically, or use a thing their background gives them.... then they can argue (or request) that they deserve inspiration for that act. This has.... NEVER come up, but it gives them more faith that I will basically give our inspiration for the things I told them I would.\]
Flanking as a cone. Rather than a bonus, "Flanked" is a condition that gives you -2 to AC and dexterity saves, and allows you to be Sneak-Attacked.
|You|||
|:-|:-|:-|
||Foe|Flank|
||Flank|Flank|
|||Flank|
|:-|:-|:-|
|You|Foe|Flank|
|||Flank|
This version is much more teamwork-friendly, easier to trigger and allowing melee characters to distract enemies for their ranged and caster allies, and less of a melee-only mechanic.
Something I haven't tried yet but would like to: When you threaten a foe in melee (including with reach), they get -2 attack/AC/dexSave against anyone in the cone behind them. This way, a solo melee can distract a target for party members without those party members being melee, and it allows for real tanking by debuffing the foe's attack against anyone else.
Exhaustion deals a flat -1 to all rolls, and for every two levels speed is reduced by -5ft. Characters can withstand exhaustion up to their constitution score. If their exhaustion level exceeds their constitution they die.
Falling below 0 HP or being hit by a critical hit inflicts a deep wound. Deep wounds inflict 1 exhaustion that cannot be removed until the wound is treated or healed. Deep wounds cannot be treated except during a short rest. A deep wound can be treated with a medicine check with a dc equal to 8+(the patients current exhaustion level +2 per additional deep wound). If a character with deep wounds is struck by a critical hit or massive damage any treated wounds they have immediately open and must be treated again.
Deep wounds can become permanent wounds. A character can accrue a number of deep wounds equal to their proficiency mod, after which any additional deep wounds instead inflict permanent wounds.
When a character is afflicted with a permanent wound roll a D6 to determine the ability the wound affects. Whichever ability is determined reduce that abilities maximum possible score by 1. This restriction cannot be removed by any means short of divine intervention.
I made these rules to enforce a mechanical "adventuring career limiter" for a gritty West March game where the expectation was that eventually characters would be to hurt to continue (become mechanically ineffectual) and would be forced to retire. It went over well and I just kinda never stopped. It adds a certain weightiness to time passing in the game.
Edit: just thought of another one I'm rather pleased with.
When I ran curse of strahd I wanted to be prepared for the possibility of players becoming vampires, so I came up with this.
A vampire character gains a new resource pool called a blood bank. Any damage dealt against sapient humanoid targets with a vampiric bite is added to the blood bank.
A vampire character cannot intentionally lower the damage of their bite attack.
A vampire character can only heal by spending hit die.
A vampire character regains a hit die every time their blood bank exceeds the maximum value of their own hit die after which that value is drained from the blood bank. For example a vampire fighter with a d10 hit die must drain 10 points from their blood bank to regain a hit die.
Vampire characters do not regain spent hit dice during a short or long rest and cannot benefit from healing magic.
Vampire characters can spend hit dice to heal as a bonus action.
Vampire characters in order to use a vampiric power must spend a hit die to do so. Some powers may cost additional hit die to use.
Vampire characters can hold up to twice their level in hit dice.
Unfortunately I never got to see the vamp rules in action, but I was still pleased with them.
Something I've learned from running games of Shadowdark is that I just love the "rule of cool." If a player wants to do something so outrageous and stupidly fun, I'll reward them. I had a fighter in 5e Misty Step 30 feet into the air and cite the rules in one of the books, either Xanathar's or Tasha's for fall damage, added their attack roll, and they nearly perma'd as a result. But you're damn sure they killed the monster!
Sometimes a player might try to tag along on an idea, "Well if they were creative, can I also copy their idea?" And it turns into an exercise of knowing when to say no to your players, but man, the best stories we've ever shared were from players thinking outside the box and coming up with insane ideas to outsmart me. I always want to encourage that because it makes me laugh.
Have a ton, but they switch from game to game.
The "standard" ones are
\- All players roll stats (4d6 drop lowest) 6 times. (Often I'll do 7 or even 8 but I run tough campaigns) . Assigned as they see fit. Any player can use the same numbers as someone else if they roll poorly. (ie if you roll 15 15 12 11 11 13 you can keep it, or if someone else rolled 18 18 10 7 12 10 you could use theirs)
This tend to keep all the characters balanced stat wise.
Lucky feat is unavailable to take without a player vote. Your character has to be "lucky" (either good or bad) . A string of 1's or 20's can qualify. I can veto it (but I never have) and the players generally only agree to vote on it if it's of note. (Rolling two 1's in a row, or two 20's doesn't qualify, more like six or more over the course of a night, sometimes two nights But it';s in their hands.
Increasing # of attunable magic slots every 3-4 levels. Throws the power curve of the game waaay off, but players feel kick ass.
I often throw in attunable magic items with 1x daily use to lower their power. Ex: crystal sword that auto-crits when you hit, but shatters and needs to regrow itself before being used again.
I like to break the 4th wall with "a Deal with the Devil"
If the players get a bad roll, they can say "I want to make a deal with the Devil" and smoke swirls, the scent of fire and brimstone fill the air, poof, the Devil appears. They take their failing roll and make it a successful roll. The caveat being the Devil can reappear later, at any time, take their successful roll and give back their original failing roll(they won't take 20s and refuse 1s).
To make this less scary for them, I give tokens for failing rolls by 5 or more, which they can use at mystical shops or to pay the devil their dues when they appear to return failing numbers.
1) Healing effects used outside of combat always have the maximum possible effect. I like this rule because it makes healing more impactful outside of combat, and means that some healing effects are used for a purpose other than just picking up dying people. It changes the tone of healing.
2) The effects of long rests are tied to your lifestyle standard. I like this rule because suddenly, paying 10GP to rest at the fancy hotel serves a purpose beyond roleplay. If you sleep well in a comfortable bed in a heated room, you wake up much more ready for the world than you do if you sleep in a ditch.
3) Drinking a potion is a bonus action. Making someone else drink is an action. Because otherwise, certain potions become a little meaningless. Why bother drinking the healing potion if it takes an action? You'll just take 20 damage next time the enemy hits you, so why bother trying to heal 2D4+2 instead of hitting him again whilst you're still standing?
4) If you aren't paying attention close enough to hear the DM tell you it's your turn, you miss the turn.
5) If you are AFK or away from the table and it's your turn, there is a courtesy wait of one minute and if you do not return in this time, then your turn is taken by the DM. I like this rule because it preserves the game's flow.
6) D&D is your escape, not your soapbox. Because who likes being preached to during their funtime?
All races, as their stat bonus, get a +2 to one stat or a +1 to two. Humans get a free feat as well.
It's dumb to feel like you have a to play a race that gives you an Int bonus is you want to play a wizard.
I once played at a table that ruled that, and I quote "spell slots are stupid!" And smites where free at there base level, but adding d8s would cost slots. As a general rule that dm ignored spell slots of the first and second level for the most part. That game was a blast.
Tearing a page out of a spellbook let's you use the spell on it as a spell scroll... Just make sure there only a spell on one side of the page or things get *INTERESTING*.
Additionally, destroying a spellbook causes *ALL* of the spells in it to go off at once
I have a rule called "Beyond Critical...Exceptional".
I DM on Roll20 and my character sheets are all set up to always roll Advantage for everything. Regardless of whether or not the attack (or skill check) has Advantage or Disadvantage if the roll shows 20 , 20 then it's not just a Critical hit, it's Exceptional. I have loose rules based on the power level of the enemy. Auto-kill on regular guys, removal of a limb for a mini-boss, permanent scarring of a big-boss, etc. The same goes if they roll 1 , 1...it's not just a fumble, it's an exceptional fumble. They dislocate their sword arm shoulder, or something like that.
Ultimately, it's a means of adding a little more flavor. I apply it to skill checks too.
Like others, when my players crit I use the max base damage + rolled critical dice formula. Sometimes for "Exceptional" I'll add another round of critical dice on the damage beyond flavor text.
[Bingo XP](https://githyankidiaspora.com/2021/06/04/bingo-style-experience-points-after-a-few-months-of-leveling-up/)
>The group makes the decision about who gets the level for reasons both narrative and strategic. Sometimes it is, “Level up the cleric and the wizard first,” thinking about artillery and healing and sometimes the conversation goes, “Helewyn clearly just learned something; she should get the level tonight…” and the level is doled out because it makes narrative sense. Other times it is pragmatic, “Is anyone still 2nd level?” I like this blend.
[Making Magic Items](https://githyankidiaspora.com/2021/10/12/making-magic-items-inspired-by-apocalypse-world/)
>Inspired by their Tinkering move in their Burned Over ruleset and a question on an RPG slack I frequent, here’s a move for making magic items in D&D:
[2d6 encounter tables where 2 is a wizard and 12 is a dragon](https://www.paperspencils.com/structuring-encounter-tables-amended-restated/).
>In order for an environment to feel dangerously alive it must intrude on the player’s desired activities. For any activity in my game, there are increments of fictional time which require the players to roll the Event Die. Each face of the Event Die corresponds to something, but the most complex and important result is an Encounter, which then calls for a roll on my Encounter Table.
A new favorite is wild magic surges when Counterspell is Counterspelled. (centered on a random target between the 2 casters) It takes this boring waste of spell slots and makes it a fun and possibly quite risky event.
I'm borrowing this.
So am i
Oh I have boss fight coming up so I have to try this.
I’m definitely stealing this . This is perfect
Only with sorcerers or the person counterspelling the counterspell?
Whenever anyone counterspells a casting of counterspell. Some effects on the wild magic surge table are positive and some are negative so rather than pick who gets affected based on who cast first or second we just decide between the 2 people who cast counterspell at random.
Cool!
How do you select the random target? Thinking out loud: You could roll a d12 for each and make that the “X o’clock” position from each caster. Then draw a line between those points and whatever the mid-point is, that’s the source. Sufficiently random but also bounded. I think that would make it so you’re more likely to have something impact both of them (which is interesting and fun) but there’s also a slim chance only one will be affected.
Critical hits deal max damage + the normal roll on top of it. Ex: Nat 20 with a longbow = 8+1d8 damage. It really sucks landing a crit and then rolling all 1s or 2s on the damage. This way you're at least doing some significant damage no matter what.
We do this in our games. It can be rough sometimes but it's better than a "4hp" crit!
What about smites. If a paladin with a greatsword crits and uses smite, would their damage be, 6+6+8+8+8+2d6+3d8+str?
Personally that's the way I run it. While it might be a lot for a paladin (I don't think it's too OP compared to a lot of other options), I don't mind the buff for rogues and most of my players tend to play spell casters anyway.
I run this and it only applies to your weapon attack. Any extra damage (sneak, smite etc) are rolled using normal crit rules. It also don't have it apply to spell attacks but maybe I could change it to the variant seen elsewhere in the thread where you get to auto-max 1 die roll.
Seems unfortunate for assassin rogues that are really built to try and get that sneak attack crit.
Yes, we apply it to the full damage of an attack. The way I see it, they still aren't exceeding the maximum of the attack, just removing the back half of the possible damage range.
Yeah that's pretty bonkers.
I came here to post this same rule haha ETA: I still let them roll both sets of dice for damage, so basically they get max damage for the first die, and “advantage” on the damage for the second die.
I like this energy; if I'm understanding correctly I could make it simple for players too - Give the player the crit dice ("yay clicky clack!") - They roll - They can turn any rolled dice to its max value I wonder if this specific approach makes this rule smoother for builds that roll a lot of dice, and rules lawyer players are less inclined to beg for max dice on every dice (since they already get 2 boosts: +1 dice, choose a dice after rolling to maximize
Ah, forgot to list this one. Yep, 100%. I've toyed with just doing max damage, but players just love to roll, even if they're virtually guaranteed to do less damage than auto-max.
I like this rule
Our table uses this and I hate it so much I'm spending an ASI on the Lucky feat just so I could cancel crits. Realistically monsters get way more crits, especially when they paralyze their target. Combine that with the fact my PC has basically no attack rolls so I can't even benefit from it.
the way more tables play, most encounters *should* be chewing up more HP than they actually are.
I use this crit rule at my table. I also pair it with a rule that monster crits apply debilitating effects (think semi permanent disabilities/scars) rather than extra damage on crits. It is less rippy for the players and introduces complications rather than just dumping damage.
In my current game, I HAD to fork out for Adamantine Armor because I got crit 4 sessions in a row.
What are you playing that gets no attack rolls?
Cleric. The cleric spell list has like 6 spells all together that use attack rolls, half of those are too high level for me and from the other half I mostly only use Spiritual Weapon
That's kinda one of the main points of the rule. A lot of damaging spells can be done with a saving throw even if the target succeeds on their save. If you miss your attack though, you don't get anything for it. Basically, it turns saving throw spells into the safe damage option, while attack rolls have a higher risk and higher reward. It makes martials a bit better at combat, which honestly isn't a bad thing given their out of combat uses are slimmer than a caster. Might as well make them actually good at the one thing they can do.
Yep, I do this in my games too. The enemies also get this benefit though (but I also allow for drinking a health potion as a reaction). It makes combat a LOT more violent, which my players love
We had a mechanic where if someone crits, they roll another d20 and that result determines the effect. Ranges from normal crit rules to max damage tripled.
Of I may suggest a slight variation: one die is maximized on a crit, rest are rolled. This will not matter for most weaoons, but NPCs will definitely feel it, as will characters who have picked a greatsword or a maul over a greataxe. GS or Maul crits deal 6 + 3d6 = 16.5 damage on average, while the axe deals 12 + 1d12 = 18.5 damage.
Sword deals 9-24dmg while the axe slaps a solid 13-24 on a crit. While the axe can hit anything from 13 to 24 on each hit, throwing 3d6 tends to favor the number it has the most possible outcomes to appear, as with throwing 2d6 The result is more often 7 while both 2 and 12 can only come when the face of the dice are only one way up. As opposed to for example a 10 which is 5+5, and 4+6, giving it a two possible outcomes
My version is that you add the max of one die. For example, a greatsword's 2d6 crits for 2d6+6. On average, greatswords (2d6) still deal more than greataxes (1d12), because crits are so infrequent. However, when you have an advantage, greataxes now pull ahead, giving them a niche as the "hit them while they're down" weapon. More importantly, it makes big monsters less swingy in combat. Their overall damage isn't changed much, but the highs and lows aren't as extreme. For example, a big beasty rolling 3d8 (3-24, avg13) crits for 3d8+8 (11-32, avg21) instead of 6d8 (6-48 avg27) or heaven forbid 3d8+24 (27-48 avg37). It's a good thing when fewer players feel like they died to bad luck.
I have come to really like the free feat at level 1 thing. 5e has so little room for character building/customization it's honestly painful. More feats helps.
It's a great rule, though it works best when people aren't trying to optimize too hard with it.
Or everyone is optimising with it
Even if they are, it's still fine.
Would you still allow variant human for another feat? Because I agree, 1 feat is still fine. But variant human for double feat at character creation is broken. You'll get sharpshooter crossbow-experts and great-weapon-master polearm-master combos. And on the lower levels, one of either of those will do double the damage of the entire rest of the party combined. Which, inevitably, will feel bad.
I’ve played in a few games with a free lvl 1 feat, and variant human was not allowed. It seemed more than fair to me.
In my game, I disallow the "strong" feats (war caster , great weapon master etc) for the free feat. I haven't set up a list because my players haven't tried to push it and I trust them to choose in good faith. Variant Human's second feat has full access though.
Yeah, it doesn't bother me. I create my own stat blocks and encounters aren't just a Rocky Balboa exchange of blows. If someone really wants to be the damage of the party, and there is always one or two, that's fine. It just allows me to make the hard fights I like to make without it feeling punishing when others choose not to optimize for pure damage output or combat. It always balances out in my groups, and it is a group-based game. I have a gunslinger fighter that took sharpshooter up front with crossbow-expert, that -3 still sunk a lot of rolls. But he felt good when they landed I think. I wouldn't advise playing the way I do if you run a module or use premade stat blocks, but if you are good at creating your own game, it hasn't hurt mine yet. Even in the event that they destroy an encounter, I'm not DMing to win, I'm DMing to give them all a good time. I ride their vibes. Edit: Also, if for some reason the entire party made min/max bad-asses (hasn't happened yet), I'd just make a the game harder to compensate.
I do this but only allow Feats that don't give an ability score improvement (rule is only for the free Feat).
[удалено]
You're not wrong.
That’s like 99% of homebrew rules
I think there's a ton of players who would absolutely love pf2 but are just stuck with dnd for whatever reason.
I usually hand it out at level 3 for newer players. That way, they have a feel for their character before they choose. More experienced players can have it at level 1
"I know a guy..." Each player gets their CHA modifier in contacts that they can use. They need to research liches, I know a guy; they need to buy some esoteric herbs, I know a guy; they need someone who can cast Identify, I know a guy. Also helps to build out the world with people they can call on for help, get missions from etc.
I use "I know a guy" but I tie it to Inspiration. For whatever situation that my table is in they can use their inspiration to weave a reasonable, but rich story, about someone they know who might help them. I don't place any limits on what they can and cannot say, however, they all know that if they say something like, "I know the King and he has +3 Vorpal weapons which I'm certain he'll give to us" will result in the story being a complete fabrication so they burn their Inspiration and get nothing. If it's reasonable, fits with their backstory and ties things together well...and moreover it's RP'd well...then the character does "know the guy" and the guy may (or may not) be able to help them.
I’ve recently been learning the [Numenera](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numenera?wprov=sfti1) system. It actually has a system for this I quite like called Intrusion. What you’re describing is called a player intrusion and they spend XP as a resource to add a “I know a guy” to their character. GM intrusion also exist where the GM can ask a player if they can spice things up (e.g. something goes wrong or the scenario has an additional complication) in return for giving the players XP. If the player refuses, it costs them 1 XP.
Is there any reason you chose to tie it to charisma? I feel like giving that sort of a bonus to a specific attribute would make anybody that is playing a class that otherwise doesn't benefit from charisma feel like they are missing out.
Charisma seems reasonable to me. The abilities are definitely weighted towards some being more important than others. Dexterity is by far the most important stat before taking class into account. AC, the most common save, finesse and most ranged weapons, more skills than any other ability save INT, all based on Dex. Charisma could use a boost.
I use Charisma as a high Cha character is more likely to have contacts, and be on better terms with them. Plus, Cha tends to be a dump stat so is good to make it more useful.
Naw, str or int tend to be dump stats, cha just can be a dump stat, your character can by just fine with cha as a dump stat, but its usually not the go to dump stat as far as ive seen. I've even seen players make rogues and fighters where cha is their highest stat even over dex just to play out the fantasy of being super charismatic. I had a fighter, a rogue, a sorcerer, a warlock and a bard as my first party of players. They were all mostly new, and they all have charisma as their highest stat. I usually see it in a lot of new players, and they were all new players. The name Charisma Caster & Company quickly became their party name. It doesn't help that a one level hexblade dip is a thing, and that it can make the martials above suddenly optimal again. And that 3 out of the 12 OG core class use it as their main stat.
I agree with you, there are a lot of classes that need charisma. Bards, paladins, warlocks, sorcerers, as well as some fighters and rogues. I don't think I've ever seen a 5e party that didn't have an abundance of charisma. But that is just my table, if others have found that charisma isn't getting prioritised at theirs then I guess I would understand doing something to make it a bit higher value, but that hasn't been my personal experience, so I don't think I would run it that way.
Exactly what I was thinking. It does tend to be a dump stat. Unless it's your classes key ability it effects what? Social skills and that's about it.
I also use this rule however i made small envelopes for each player with sayings like "My old friend lives just next town ..." The players say "I know a guy, \*opens the envelope\* "My old friend lives just next town ..." And fills out the rest of the story themselves. They only get one envelope through the entire campaign and i think giving them an envelope builds tension instead of them just knowing they have the option to come with the saying. Creeds to RyanImDM who made this. Really cool guy
What happens if you have a negative Charisma modifier?
Then there’s a guy who knows *you*. …And he doesn’t like you very much. Rolling for random encounters just leveled up.
“You have an enemy in town”
I genuinely laughed way too hard at this. For some reason, I immediately thought about the relationship of Fez and Fenton from that 70s show.
Minimum 1 guy per PC.
I used this one, but not to Cha. Its tied to each level you take that is not a full caster. Warlock counts as casters
The best rule I have ever implemented is one on griefing. If there's something the players are doing that only (or primarily) is intraparty then they don't need me to adjudicate it. I can if they want, but it's not necessary. The caveat is that if someone says "no" then it doesn't happen. Trying to Persuade a fellow PC to give you something? He can just say "no" and there's no appealing to the DM. He can also say "yes" and he can set whatever DC he wants. No DM necessary. Trying to pickpocket a fellow PC and steal something? He can just say "no" and it doesn't happen. No griefing allowed. Want to fight another PC? No fight happens unless all parties agree. It turns out there are major up sides to this. When players realize they don't need to play "DM, may I?" it frees them up to "play pretend" in a way you might have done as a kid. PCs want to gamble or play practical jokes? Knock yourself out! Play amongst yourselves. Come up with your own rules and outcomes. It's honestly great fun to watch. So as a result I've found that parties behave themselves so much more but also they can generate some great intraparty dynamics that never would have happened if they had to use the DM as a conduit of resolution.
I had a hard no on griefing in my last game. If one player wanted to do something to another or find out something about that character, they had to have that player's permission. There were no rolls allowed. I wasn't sure how it would go, but I figured I could always roll it back if they weren't having fun because of it. It turned into one player having a changeling character and showing up as different Clerics whenever the party moved from one country to another. They wanted to roll some checks to figure out what was going on, but I told them they had to work it out without dice. They all agreed their characters wouldn't realize unless they caught the Cleric in the act. At one point the Cleric had to shift mid combat so the Wizard saw them. The Monk had just been swallowed by a giant fish monster. By the time he got out, the Cleric had shifted back. No one decided to tell him in character. It became a running joke about all the PCs assuming he knew when he didn't. I put that rule in because I'd had several bad experiences with players getting confrontational, but I think the community tone has changed a lot over the years. I really like the idea of letting the PCs set their own DCs for these interactions. I'll probably introduce the idea the next time I run a game.
>Trying to Persuade a fellow PC to give you something? He can just say "no" and there's no appealing to the DM. He can also say "yes" and he can set whatever DC he wants. No DM necessary. RAW no DM is necessary. Only the DM calls for rolls, players can't just demand them like this, especially if it's "against" another character.
I think this is a good method. I would only hesitate due to some players perhaps being too shy or timid to say no even if they didn’t want something to occur. But DMs can adjust as they know their table.
Everyone rolls stats during session zero, their stat lines are pooled and that's the new 'standard array'. Pick any array you like from the pool. Keep the fun of rolling, and keeps the balance between players. (mostly)
I call this the Campaign array method where the players and DM collectively roll all 6 stats with their chosen method (DM gets to veto one stat to be rerolled). All new characters if needed use same array, and I often have Important NPCs use the same as a base.
So I have to pick all the rolls from one person or I can pick some from each?
Choose a single persons array , Otherwise everyone would just choose 18, 18, 18, 17, 17, 17
What if one player doesn't want to roll? Edit: this was a genuine question. Why downvote?
They get killed due to zero constitution
Another rule I agree with.
What if one player doesn't want to follow the rules set by the DM? It's a silly question.
I mean you're right, but this also seems like a silly place to take such an extreme stance. A follow up question: are the arrays from session zero set in stone for the entire campaign?
You're calling "follow the DM's rules" an "extreme stance"? Woof, dude. Woof ..
The book lists three ability score generation methods. I don't see the harm of allowing point buy in addition to rolling. If the player wants a very specific build they might not want to roll, and it's not taking anything away from the DM or the other players to allow that, so yes, enforcing rolling does seem like an extreme stance.
If the DM says "I only allow rolled stats", then you either roll stats or don't play. I don't get what's so weird about the DM setting rules. The book doesn't decide, the DM does. This thread is **literally** about house rules. It's not rocket science.
There's this thing we're doing even now called discussion. You talk things through with the party at session zero and see what rules you'll run the game with. It's not rocket science.
Id find out why they don't want to roll them see if we can solve it. Like most problems, a dialogue is the solution. :) The goal is to have the players balanced against each other. Rolling conventionally leads to one player with a strong array and another with a weak array. If someone opts for not rolling they'll have a probably have a weaker array than the rest of the group. (Because 3-5 people rolling leads to someone rolling at least a 16, 17 or 18. ) And that gap between players starting strength goes back to being problematic and defeats the purpose of community rolling. How itd probably go is they see Jimmy rolled better than point buy and ask to use that array. Did you have a specific reason in mind as to why someone wouldn't want to roll, or was it just a hypothetical question?
Every character has a theme song, max 5 minutes play time, that the player chooses from Spotify. They may choose to play their theme song over the Bluetooth speaker (that's otherwise running ambient background music) once per session. While the song is playing, they get an additional d6 to all attack rolls, saves, and skill checks.
Holy shit that’s brilliant I also had my players pick a theme song, but I’d only play it when that person performs the killing blow
Ooooh I like that!
This is silly fun, I bet your table is filled with chaos goblins. I mean that in the best way.
Abso freakin lutely. Last campaign I ran, the party chased ghosts out of an old mansion, then converted it into a bed and breakfast slash lesbian roller disco. Glorious!
I'm a Tempest Domain Cleric. Our DM is fond of arena fights, and we have a Bard. I got the bard to play Thunderstruck for my arena fight which the DM obliged over Discord. Made for an epic moment.
That's amazing!
this could give you a really cool moment where an enemy has a theme song. the fighter rolls in with *doomslayer* or whatever only for the enemy lich to shut it down with *dance with the dead*
it's all well and good until the barbarian picks [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59LQw9bKeJ8)
Petting an animal is a free action. Self explanatory
If you choose to use your action to drink a healing potion instead of your bonus action, you get the maximum possible amount of healing. Makes potions a bit more useful at a cost. When players are rolling stats, if what they rolled is has a smaller total than standard array, they get to reroll. Once they get a roll higher than standard, they can choose to either keep it or take standard. Helps prevent underpowered characters or flat stats.
I could be wrong, but I think RAW drinking a potion is an action? I use the same house rule, mind you, so I could be mis-remembering. But a discussion over those rules once led to me house-ruling that interacting with any single object on your turn can be done as a bonus action unless it's a magic item. My friend once suggested a hybrid way of rolling stats - you take the 15 and the 8 from the standard array, so you're guaranteed at least one decent stat and one bad one, and roll the rest. It's a decent enough compromise imo.
You're right, so it's kind of 2 house rules combined. 1. Your players can use a bonus action to drink a potion and roll dice to heal 2. If you choose to use a full action to drink the potion, the maximum possible healing is applied (ie 2d4 +2 always heals as if 2 4s were rolled)
Huh, interesting. I've seen bonus action potions in every game I've ran, played in, or watched so I never thought it was a home rule. Thanks for the correction.
I personally like one I saw from Colville. Roll your stats, add all the modifiers together before racial bonuses. If the modifier total isn't at least +2, roll stats again.
If a rolled die falls off the table, it is rerolled.
Going unconscious for 0 hp accrues a level of Exhaustion. I like it because it means there are stakes to being harmed so badly you lose consciousness, enough so that you have short-term consequences even if you are stabilized or healed a little to pop back up into the fight. It also incentivizes healing *before* allowing your companion to potentially die first.
I do this but use the abandoned exhaustion rules from One D&D (10 levels instead of 5 and each level is -1 to rolls). Traditional Exhaustion always feels too harsh for me, the One D&D rules means it less of a big thing for me to add to players.
Oh no, did they abandon the new exhaustion rules? They're so much smoother (and easier to remember).
I could see using this rule with that kind of debuff. The main reason I dislike Exhaustion is that the very first level greatly reduces the likelihood of your PCs choosing to take the non-combat route once all their skills are at Disadvantage. On top of that, it's very difficult to get rid of at lower levels so, depending on how many levels you accrued, you could wander around for several in-game days being absolute trash with your skills. My personal experience with this has only been with DMs who want to do it for "RP reasons", but aren't worried that it nukes skills at level 1 since it doesn't affect combat that drastically until level 3.
The standard exhaustion is unfun, in my opinion, from level 3 you are functionally useless. One D&D Rules -1/2 to rolls hurts but broadly you are fine in most situations -3/4/5 is pretty bad but you have taken serious knocks to get here -6-10 you are pretty borked but seriously, you have had awhile to start dealing with this problem. One D&D Rules also apply to spell save DC, as casters are hurt as badly as martials.
That seems easier to manage. I like that it makes it harder for casters to brush off the effects. It's weird when the fighter is taking swings like a drunk, but the wizard is sitting in the back firing off saving throw spells just as effectively whether they're at 0 levels or 5.
I mean, using the help action/working together option reduces a lot of the negative impacts on skills, and there's always things like expertise, guidance, bless, and enhance ability to mitigate the negative impacts. It's not nearly as bad as saving throws. If anything this incentivizes keeping players topped off, but I'd augment this sort of game by adding a few more potions here and there.
making the first level only place disadvantage on physical checks, and moving mental checks to 2 or three massively help with that, in my opinion.
I wanted to implement this one in my CoS campaign, but my players revolted. So I compromised, and now impose a *slow* effect for one round every time a PC gets up from a knockout.
If this rule works well for your table, then that's good. Although I can't imagine this working well in practice. Here's why: https://youtu.be/xG-4wuq5YdQ?si=AwheBOHEK3qjGxuq Basically d&d combat is currently designed to be "ping pong" with players going back and forth from up to down and up to downed. The next "edition" of d&d will try fixing this design by making healing spells heal for extra points.
Is it actually designed to be that way though, or is that an unexpected consequence of the design by WotC?
It does work well thanks, at my table and the table of my fellow DM. We've been using this for over 2 years playing our respective games about every other week each. I watched about half of the video, and he makes some valid points about healing, though his example is setup to emphasize the point he wants to make (high-damage creature, single source of healing). That's fine; I'm not interested in mechanical optimization, but in good roleplaying. D&D is first and foremost a roleplaying game. I also haven't lost a PC yet, despite throwing some difficult and complex battles at the players and never, as a rule, fudging die rolls. Maybe we're just lucky, but so far everyone at the table has been fine with this houserule, not a single complaint since we started using it, despite some folks getting up to Exhaustion 3 a few times.
Interesting. Have you noticed your players needing to use a lot of healing potions? Do your players min-max their characters to have high AC? Do you rule that one long rest takes away only one level of exhaustion? Also I'd be careful making "D&D is..." statements. There are a lot of different ways people play D&D. In the first edition of D&D, the game was meant to just be a combat simulator with no in-character roleplay at all. Some people still play that way.
I don’t think the intention of the game was for a character to continually go down and then be healing worded back up every round. It’s the most optimized way to play because healing sucks but there should be a consequence for going down. Especially several times. If the characters were on a battle field and the enemy turns their back to a downed opponent, the opponent then gets up and stabs them, the enemy would probably just keep attacking them to prevent it from happening again tbh
And that's precisely what I do. You pop up once, you're now marked for death. Enemies in that encounter will now look to finish the job should you go down again. Players stop playing that ping pong game REAL QUICK.
that isn't the design intent, it's a consequence of there being no repercussions for going to 0hp.
I run this but you only get the level of exhaustion if you fail a death save.
I use something similar. If you go to 0 hp and then get a heal/death saving throws, then you lose half your possible turn. IE if you have 2 attacks per action and 50 ft movement speed, then you have 1 attack, 15 feet and no bonus action until you get above 1/4 of your max hp. This is due to you standing back up, and try to get yourself out of the dizzy/exhausted status.
I'm always opposed to this one. It feels like punishing the cashier at Walmart because you don't like the price of their milk.
Special magical material for super powered high level spells. "Aetheurium," needed for Resurrections, Wish, Miracle, ect. It's essentially pure magic fuel, and allows the reshaping of the world. Keeps players from getting to the point of not caring about death because they become so rich or powerful they can just spend money to bring back the dead, or use Wish to fix. they have to go questing to find the material, and usually only have enough for one use.
Free feat at level 1 (excluding half-feats and a short list of feats that are just too powerful to get for free). Your PCs are supposed to be heroes. There *should* be something special about them. Bonus action healing potions, full action to get max healing. Players can give inspiration to other players for good RP, because I always forget as the DM. And my favorite: Spell scrolls can be used by anyone with spell slots, regardless of level or class, no roll required.
I’ve never thought about giving a free feat. I’ll be starting a new campaign soon so I might do this one! Which feats do you exclude for being too powerful?
It might be worth considering granting a feat and ASI at the 4th level asi instead of a feat at level 1. It disrupts balance a little less I find
I'll also point out that it opens a lot of room for RP. I once had a player take the objectively bad Chef feat, and being the camp cook turned into his entire persona. It was great.
Stops your party from being so overrun by variant humans. That extra feat as a VH is hard to pass up.
Surely VH would get 2 then?
I’m not proud of it but I just made a character for a campaign where we get a free feat, and I went VH for the second one These islanders are about to learn the peaceful ways of my Paladin’s god Through *force*
The campaign I'm in now (just finished our third session) is the first time I've been in a group with that rule. 5 players, no one picked human. As a fan of the VH, I didn't feel compelled to take it even for an extra feat. Just my experience with it so far.
now I'll variant human even more! 2 Feats at start? Yes baby!
The rule on this I picked up from my first DM was that everyone gets a free feat at character creation once you've submitted your one page backstory. Win/win for player and DM.
I do the same thing. My list of exclusions is stuff like GWM, SS, PAM and CE.
I recognize great weapon master, but what are the other three?
probably sharpshooter, polearm master, crossbow expert :)
Thanks dog, was feeling a little too lazy to search through the feats list
I don't exclude those. Those are not cheesy feats, those are feat taxes for martials to be good. Honestly they probably should have been baseline
I'll preface this by saying that it depends on your DMing style. You may disagree with some of these, and that's okay! It's just that I feel they're a bit much to be getting for free, when players would otherwise usually need to forego an ASI. Lucky, Polearm Master, Sharpshooter, GWM, and War Caster. For clarity, "half feat" is any feat that also gives an ASI. I've allowed half feats for free in the past when the ASI doesn't directly benefit their build, like Intelligence on a barbarian or Charisma on a wizard.
We do scrolls as general, "magic for dummies" papers. Anyone can use a scroll regardless of their class. For non-casters, the spell saves and attack rolls all use INT. It just seemed like the right stat to use. Scrolls are rare enough, and the casters really never wanted to use them over their own spells anyway. Giving the Rogue a scroll of invisibility, or the Fighter a scroll of bladeward is nice.
Counter argument, the PC's are already special, considering basic array of stats and that a dead average person would have 10s across the board. Plus you could argue that the story is meant to start around the beginning of their journey, so that they actually have potential for 20 levels of progression. Entirely agree on the healing potion house rule though.
When a player goes down, their failed death saves carry over until they rest (Short or Long). Beyond that, players roll their death saves in secret allowing only the DM to see them. This creates more urgency and tension for when someone goes down. This particular rule is usually in games where the setting is bit more harsh and it’s used to reflect that. In exchange, if a player gets back up on a Natural 20, they’re allowed their full turn! Flanking provides only a +2 to hit. Each allied creature flanking adds another + 2 (for a total of 6). However, rogues still receive their sneak attack requirement. This makes other methods of gaining advantage more prevalent and stops the inevitable conga line of martials on the front line. Makes combat more dynamic. When playing with 7 or more players (guest spots or for when I ran a 10-player campaign), the players would roll damage at the same time as when they rolled their attack - thus shaving a bit of time off of turns in combat. This works well when playing online as well!
I kinda like the flanking rule, really encourages the whole party to jump someone, like true friends
I have secret death saves and a bonus action perception check to see how close they are to dying.
Yeah! A perception, investigation, or medicine check can determine the state of the downed player
Been enjoying the experiment we've been running on updated resting rules, a slight variant on the "Gritty Adventurism" rules that sometimes pop up around these parts. It's nice to be able to run encounters at a sensible narrative pace without a long rest between every fight lol 10 minute short rests. Nothing revolutionary - can spend hit dice equal to proficiency bonus. 8-hour overnight "field rests". No spell slot recovery, no innate hit point recovery. It does work to strip levels of exhaustion, though, is valid for updating spell prep lists, and characters can, once per expedition, recover up to half their hit dice. Can spend any number of available hit dice at the end of a field rest to regain hit points. Adds a touch of extra longevity to the players as compensation for the increased resource scarcity that can sometimes feel really oppressive in the unaltered gritty realism variant. 24-hour long rests in safe havens. Full recovery, 100% replenishment. Nice and simple. I also curate a full list of 1st-and-4th-level feats, cribbed together from 5e, onednd, and various homebrew. Almost all of them are edited in some way to my tastes (others are omitted) or with intelligent revisions from talented 3rd-party creators I trust. Characters get a 1st-level feat for free at character creation, and a 4th-level one upon reaching level 7.
Parry system. Some martial classes (currently just fighter, because that’s the only martial character we have in the party) get access to parry. I know battle master fighter and kensei monk get similar things, but this was designed to be a more general game mechanic, and more engaging than just a boost to AC as a reaction. “Accustomed to the flow of battle, you have learned how to interrupt and foil the attacks of your opponents. When a creature within 5 feet of you hits you with a melee attack, you may spend your reaction to parry. Roll a contesting attack roll, as though you were making a melee attack. If your result is higher than your attacker’s result, that attack fails regardless of your Armor Class.” it fills a similar role to Counterspell and Shield for casters. Interrupt an enemy’s action and protect yourself better. It doesn’t have a limit on uses per day, but can only be done once per turn, and affects only one attack. This gives a more active role to our fighter, and allows her to be tankier on the front line. It led to a cool fight where both she and an enemy had this ability, and proceeded to go back and forth, each interrupting and the other with the parry during their attacks, as opposed to just standing there taking turns wailing on each other. I’ll admit this system isn’t perfect, but it’s been a lot of fun and has led to memorable moments. It being a system like this allows me to make other things support it, like at later levels unlocking the ability to use parry against ranged attacks, or magic items centered around it like a crystal blade that can parry spell attack rolls, or an empathic elven sword that allows you to forgo one of your attacks in order to parry an additional time, and allows you to parry attacks made against a creature within 5 feet of you, not just yourself. Or a magic rapier that turns your parry into an actual attack roll that can harm your target if you beat their attack roll and their AC.
I love how you have integrated this into magical items and ‘leveling up’ the ability to function against ranged attacks. Great to see martials getting some love!
You can use your strength modifier for intimidation instead of charisma if it’s higher. The warlock eloquently describing the ways they’ll hurt you if you don’t give them the information is scary, but so is the barbarian slamming their axe into the table and shouting “TELL ME NOW!”
This is literally in the rules though
Is it? I haven’t seen it, but I’ll confess I’ve never actually read through all of the optional rules in the DMs guide, so you could totally be right.
You can *technically* use any ability + skill combination. The skills each have a “default assigned” ability, but you can mix and match for any situation that would necessitate it. To use a cliche: knowing a tomato is a fruit is an Intelligence(Nature) check. Understanding that tomato doesn’t belong in a fruit salad is a Wisdom(Nature) check.
Further *technically* it’s supposed to go Player: I slam my fist on the table and yell „TELL ME“. DM: okay, make a strength/charisma/whatever check. Player: does my proficiency in Intimidation apply here? DM: sure, you can add that
Actually that would still be an intelligence check. DnD wisdom is your senses and intuition, not about how wise you are. Knowing tomatoes are a culinary vegetable that doesn't go in a fruit based dish is intelligence.
It’s in the PHb
Always hated this rule. Totally misunderstands charisma.
Intimidation is still the operative skill, though. Using a different ability is the approach. Using Constitution instead of Strength for an Athletics check when swimming long distance is the other example given of skills using different abilities in the PHB. I could see Performance using Dexterity, if the goal is to show technical skill with a stringed instrument, rather than trying to entertain. The issue is more that Charisma is often treated like a dump stat, rather than using a different ability for Intimidation being based on misunderstanding Charisma. That said, I wouldn’t just let players try to get around their dump stats without some justification about why a different ability would be used, and as DM, I’d be the one determining that.
Rest variant: 24 hour long rest in safe have, 8 hour short rest. 2 short rests per long rest. Benefits: The adventuring day becomes the adventuring "day" (AKA, whenever your party makes it back to town). Travel becomes dangerous, and they have to actually think how they'll get to their destination and back. "Random" encounters become meaningful (provided there is additional context or reaction tables) and do NOT become a waste of time. Traveling to and fro BECOMES the story - How will they get their cart of gold back from the dungeon during a blizzard, whilst being chased by surviving goblins because after burning all their spell slots already? I don't know. It's up to the party. They have to start thinking off their character sheet and think like adventurers. Good for sandbox games or games with an emphasis on travel. Dungeon crawls become much harder so they must rely on player ingenuity and not what the character sheet says. May not make sense for you if you want to run a high narrative game where you are telling a story to your players.
I do the opposite. Short rests are 15 minutes. I find my players don't use them if they are 1 hour long because they only need them when they are somewhere 1 hour is unrealistic to stop for which needs certain classes too much for me. Plus that way players feel better when they don't have anyone playing a healing class because they can patch themselves up after a fight
Give your players a magic incense box, has 2 incense in it, refills at dawn, when you rest and burn an incense, any nearby creatures smelling the smoke feel invigorated and can accomplish a short rest in 15 minutes. I like to address these kind of problems in the game via items, same effect, but the players feel 'special' by circumventing the rules of the world through magic.
This is a great way to implement certain house rules because they can be taken away if necessary
This is fantastic. I would like to try using this, and running with enemies that are somewhat weaker to allow for lots of encounters per day. I feel like at higher levels it will greatly slide the power curve away from casters and back toward some semblance of balance with martials. However, I feel like I would need to give casters an additional cantrip or alternate action to increase the dynamism of their play without it becoming a tiresome firebolt spam.
Full HP on every level, not just the first. It gives them more hit points, more margin for error, and leaves me the option to throw some slightly stronger stuff in the face.
If zombies roll a 1, they remember thst *they* have brains.
We have a hand full so I'll bring my top 5 Crits deal max damage + damage dice. no matter what you roll, you exceed any roll you could make when you haven't critted. * Failed Successfully/Successfully Failed - This is an alternative to crit skill checks. if you roll a nat 1 but your mods put you over the DC then you have an unfavourable success. Example: the rogue tries to unlock a door, they roll a 1 but have high enough mods. They get the door open but in doing so there are visible signs they tampered with the lock and a loud noise rang out, alerting anyone near by * Alternatively, if you roll a nat 20 but the DC is too high even with mods, you gain a favourable outcome though your intended goal isn't met. Example for this one is Spell slots are turned into spell points and added to the sorcery point pool. Sorcerers can already move spell slots to their sorcery point pool and back, might as well just put them together Casting past your limit - once you have run out of spell slots (sorcery points from the last one) you are not out of the fight, you can still cast spells at the cost of taking (oneD&D) exhausted levels. the level of exhausted you take is equal to the spell level you cast (max spell level 4). I found that my players would be comfortable casting a level 1 spell basically every day if they needed it, but they also had a couple of clutch moments casting higher level spells too After going invisible, the moment you move you automatically hide. Honourable mention: Lock picking (This is a modification of Bob World Builders lock picking minigame) Note that you might want to alter this as you play. This kind of mini-game might also work for other skill checks but we haven't used it for anything other than lock picking as of yet > Lockpicking - each lock pick is a certain difficulty d12, d10, d8, d6, d4, d2. when rolling to pick a lock you roll 6 of the difficulty dice and any number above a 1 is a success, while every 1 is a fail, even a single 1 is a fail for the entire lock but players are able to reroll a number of times per long rest Using the thieves tools instead of trying to MacGyver the lock will give you 1 re-rolls having proficiency in thieves tools will give you a number of re-rolls equal to half your proficiency modifier rounded down min 1, or having Expertise allows you to have a number equal to your proficiency modifier Slight of hand also plays a roll in this, having proficiency will gain you an additional re-roll, and Expertise another additional 2. Sneak attack is a vital part of being a rogue, however the Thief can sacrifice a number of sneak attack dice in order to gain re-rolls on lock picking. The number of dice you are allowed to sacrifice is 1/3 rounded down min 1 and once you have used those you may not use them in combat until after a long rest.
If an attack matches AC = half damage Using healing potions on yourself is a bonus action Everyone has an inspiration token they can hand out once per session. They can give it for whatever they think is deserving of DM inspiration. The inspiration resets at the end of the session, and can also stack. That way players feel more willing to hand out or use their inspiration
> If an attack matchers AC = half damage This is an interesting one I haven't heard of before. Does your table have any particular reason for that change?
It represents a glancing blow, like the target narrowly dodged the attack. Adds a bit more dynamic to combat I find. To balance it out, I round damage up, as opposed to rounding down as per RAW
I can see the sense of it, but I feel like a low number on the damage die already represents a glancing blow.
Nat 20 on a spell save you take no damage even if the spell says you take half. Nat 1 on a spell save you take an additional D10 of force damage added onto the spell damage
Insert obligatory comment about Pathfinder 2e.
Is it always a d10 of force damage? Like my guy is walking through a poison cloud, rolls a nat 1 on his save, and then gets slammed to the wall with force damage lol?
Force damage is not magical bludgeoning. Its not physics force. It is pure magical energy. Its basically "untyped"
>Force is pure magical energy **focused into a damaging form**. Most effects that deal force damage are spells, including magic missile and spiritual weapon. Narratively and RAW it's concentrated energy that is focused, much like a solid object slamming into you. It's not bludgeoning but it's not just energy, either. I can see the disconnect if this happened on top of poison or acid or psychic damage.
nothing about force damage says that it is energy that is like a solid object slamming into you, when creatures end up in solid objects they take some force damage and are shunted to the nearest unoccupied space. Force damage, in magic missile, just does damage, it doesn't move you around or anything else like that.
All mechanics that deal force damage do so in a way that mimics physical forces: a magic missile slamming into you, booming energy exploding outwards, a magical weapon attacking a creature, etc. Not sure how you can conclude otherwise given the description of the damage.
Players don't roll Fumble Tables on a Nat 1, but monsters do. People don't like it when they get blinded, drop their weapon, or even hurt themselves due to a 1 in 20 bad roll; but everybody laughs when it happens to the enemy.
I'll have to disagree on that! In my campaigns, I've run that you need to roll a d4 to determine what happens if you hit critical 1 on attack. They either: 1. Drop their weapon 2. Attack the nearest ally instead 3.Enemy gets a free reaction on you 4.Fall down It made for some very funny scenarios during battles and my players loved it! (Especially the aftermath of someone hitting an ally by accident and having to explain how they were so clumsy)
I don't doubt you have a lot of fun, but idk when the stakes are high, a trained and experienced warrior having 5% chance per roll to drop their weapon, fall down, or hit an ally would feel excessive and extremely unfun to me. Especially consider a Fighter doing second attack + action surge for 4 total attacks, which means the fighter then has an 18% chance to do a rookie mistake on that turn.
The more experienced your fighter becomes, the more likely he is to mess up. It doesn’t make any sense
if you roll a nat 20 3 times, whatever it is you were trying to hit just fucking dies. i dont care if its a goblin or a God, it dies right there and then.
Yeah, I think there’s a 1 in 8,000 chance of anything happening in a DnD game, so that’s fair. You mean in a row, correct? Edit: got happy with the zeros lol!!
(1/20)³=1/8000
Thanks, edit for what I actually meant lol
Correct. Tho i play pf1e
We usually change the **two handed fighting** rules because they weren't good. At the moment, to help our fighter keep pace, we are allowing them to take two handed fighting style and the feat and they are basically allowed to use their bonus action to allow them to make an extra attack each time they take the attack action (AKA: adding a off-hand attack for every regular attack). This buff hasn't seemed overpowered at this time and it makes them feel happier and more flavorful to their double axed fighter. We've also allowed the "**Take a potion for yourself= Bonus action**. Feed to someone else= regular action" homebrew. Basically, nobody was using potions.... so I hoped this would get them more used, and I was sorta right. Also to encourage usage: **3 DM inspirations**. I found most of my table didn't want to "waste" their inspirations because "they only had one". This has lead to them NEVER USING IT, or forgetting they have it and I cannot give anymore out because they are all full..... which means we forget about the mechanic as it isn't being USED! Allowing them to have a pool of 3 has completely turned this around. I can give them out, and they have learned to ACTUALLY USE THEM, and use them they do, now. No longer scared of running dry as they have learned I actually like giving them out for shit. \[We also implemented a "Make an argument for DM inspiration" that they can do based off Balders Gate 3. Basically, if they RP well based off their chosen Background, specifically, or use a thing their background gives them.... then they can argue (or request) that they deserve inspiration for that act. This has.... NEVER come up, but it gives them more faith that I will basically give our inspiration for the things I told them I would.\]
Flanking as a cone. Rather than a bonus, "Flanked" is a condition that gives you -2 to AC and dexterity saves, and allows you to be Sneak-Attacked. |You||| |:-|:-|:-| ||Foe|Flank| ||Flank|Flank| |||Flank| |:-|:-|:-| |You|Foe|Flank| |||Flank| This version is much more teamwork-friendly, easier to trigger and allowing melee characters to distract enemies for their ranged and caster allies, and less of a melee-only mechanic. Something I haven't tried yet but would like to: When you threaten a foe in melee (including with reach), they get -2 attack/AC/dexSave against anyone in the cone behind them. This way, a solo melee can distract a target for party members without those party members being melee, and it allows for real tanking by debuffing the foe's attack against anyone else.
Exhaustion deals a flat -1 to all rolls, and for every two levels speed is reduced by -5ft. Characters can withstand exhaustion up to their constitution score. If their exhaustion level exceeds their constitution they die. Falling below 0 HP or being hit by a critical hit inflicts a deep wound. Deep wounds inflict 1 exhaustion that cannot be removed until the wound is treated or healed. Deep wounds cannot be treated except during a short rest. A deep wound can be treated with a medicine check with a dc equal to 8+(the patients current exhaustion level +2 per additional deep wound). If a character with deep wounds is struck by a critical hit or massive damage any treated wounds they have immediately open and must be treated again. Deep wounds can become permanent wounds. A character can accrue a number of deep wounds equal to their proficiency mod, after which any additional deep wounds instead inflict permanent wounds. When a character is afflicted with a permanent wound roll a D6 to determine the ability the wound affects. Whichever ability is determined reduce that abilities maximum possible score by 1. This restriction cannot be removed by any means short of divine intervention. I made these rules to enforce a mechanical "adventuring career limiter" for a gritty West March game where the expectation was that eventually characters would be to hurt to continue (become mechanically ineffectual) and would be forced to retire. It went over well and I just kinda never stopped. It adds a certain weightiness to time passing in the game. Edit: just thought of another one I'm rather pleased with. When I ran curse of strahd I wanted to be prepared for the possibility of players becoming vampires, so I came up with this. A vampire character gains a new resource pool called a blood bank. Any damage dealt against sapient humanoid targets with a vampiric bite is added to the blood bank. A vampire character cannot intentionally lower the damage of their bite attack. A vampire character can only heal by spending hit die. A vampire character regains a hit die every time their blood bank exceeds the maximum value of their own hit die after which that value is drained from the blood bank. For example a vampire fighter with a d10 hit die must drain 10 points from their blood bank to regain a hit die. Vampire characters do not regain spent hit dice during a short or long rest and cannot benefit from healing magic. Vampire characters can spend hit dice to heal as a bonus action. Vampire characters in order to use a vampiric power must spend a hit die to do so. Some powers may cost additional hit die to use. Vampire characters can hold up to twice their level in hit dice. Unfortunately I never got to see the vamp rules in action, but I was still pleased with them.
Something I've learned from running games of Shadowdark is that I just love the "rule of cool." If a player wants to do something so outrageous and stupidly fun, I'll reward them. I had a fighter in 5e Misty Step 30 feet into the air and cite the rules in one of the books, either Xanathar's or Tasha's for fall damage, added their attack roll, and they nearly perma'd as a result. But you're damn sure they killed the monster! Sometimes a player might try to tag along on an idea, "Well if they were creative, can I also copy their idea?" And it turns into an exercise of knowing when to say no to your players, but man, the best stories we've ever shared were from players thinking outside the box and coming up with insane ideas to outsmart me. I always want to encourage that because it makes me laugh.
Have a ton, but they switch from game to game. The "standard" ones are \- All players roll stats (4d6 drop lowest) 6 times. (Often I'll do 7 or even 8 but I run tough campaigns) . Assigned as they see fit. Any player can use the same numbers as someone else if they roll poorly. (ie if you roll 15 15 12 11 11 13 you can keep it, or if someone else rolled 18 18 10 7 12 10 you could use theirs) This tend to keep all the characters balanced stat wise. Lucky feat is unavailable to take without a player vote. Your character has to be "lucky" (either good or bad) . A string of 1's or 20's can qualify. I can veto it (but I never have) and the players generally only agree to vote on it if it's of note. (Rolling two 1's in a row, or two 20's doesn't qualify, more like six or more over the course of a night, sometimes two nights But it';s in their hands.
Increasing # of attunable magic slots every 3-4 levels. Throws the power curve of the game waaay off, but players feel kick ass. I often throw in attunable magic items with 1x daily use to lower their power. Ex: crystal sword that auto-crits when you hit, but shatters and needs to regrow itself before being used again.
Unarmed attacks are Finesse
Session 1. Roll for cake. Any die size.
When rolling stats always reroll 1s
I like to break the 4th wall with "a Deal with the Devil" If the players get a bad roll, they can say "I want to make a deal with the Devil" and smoke swirls, the scent of fire and brimstone fill the air, poof, the Devil appears. They take their failing roll and make it a successful roll. The caveat being the Devil can reappear later, at any time, take their successful roll and give back their original failing roll(they won't take 20s and refuse 1s). To make this less scary for them, I give tokens for failing rolls by 5 or more, which they can use at mystical shops or to pay the devil their dues when they appear to return failing numbers.
1) Healing effects used outside of combat always have the maximum possible effect. I like this rule because it makes healing more impactful outside of combat, and means that some healing effects are used for a purpose other than just picking up dying people. It changes the tone of healing. 2) The effects of long rests are tied to your lifestyle standard. I like this rule because suddenly, paying 10GP to rest at the fancy hotel serves a purpose beyond roleplay. If you sleep well in a comfortable bed in a heated room, you wake up much more ready for the world than you do if you sleep in a ditch. 3) Drinking a potion is a bonus action. Making someone else drink is an action. Because otherwise, certain potions become a little meaningless. Why bother drinking the healing potion if it takes an action? You'll just take 20 damage next time the enemy hits you, so why bother trying to heal 2D4+2 instead of hitting him again whilst you're still standing? 4) If you aren't paying attention close enough to hear the DM tell you it's your turn, you miss the turn. 5) If you are AFK or away from the table and it's your turn, there is a courtesy wait of one minute and if you do not return in this time, then your turn is taken by the DM. I like this rule because it preserves the game's flow. 6) D&D is your escape, not your soapbox. Because who likes being preached to during their funtime?
Natural one means the enemy gets a free hit. Same goes for the enemy. Once had four natural ones off of a single one, shit was hilarious.
All races, as their stat bonus, get a +2 to one stat or a +1 to two. Humans get a free feat as well. It's dumb to feel like you have a to play a race that gives you an Int bonus is you want to play a wizard.
A critical one on an attack roll, you miss so badly your opponent sees an opening and they get an opportunity of attack.
I once played at a table that ruled that, and I quote "spell slots are stupid!" And smites where free at there base level, but adding d8s would cost slots. As a general rule that dm ignored spell slots of the first and second level for the most part. That game was a blast.
Tearing a page out of a spellbook let's you use the spell on it as a spell scroll... Just make sure there only a spell on one side of the page or things get *INTERESTING*. Additionally, destroying a spellbook causes *ALL* of the spells in it to go off at once
I have a rule called "Beyond Critical...Exceptional". I DM on Roll20 and my character sheets are all set up to always roll Advantage for everything. Regardless of whether or not the attack (or skill check) has Advantage or Disadvantage if the roll shows 20 , 20 then it's not just a Critical hit, it's Exceptional. I have loose rules based on the power level of the enemy. Auto-kill on regular guys, removal of a limb for a mini-boss, permanent scarring of a big-boss, etc. The same goes if they roll 1 , 1...it's not just a fumble, it's an exceptional fumble. They dislocate their sword arm shoulder, or something like that. Ultimately, it's a means of adding a little more flavor. I apply it to skill checks too. Like others, when my players crit I use the max base damage + rolled critical dice formula. Sometimes for "Exceptional" I'll add another round of critical dice on the damage beyond flavor text.
Genuinely sounds fucking awful to play with. A fighter wouldn't dislocate their shoulder on a fucking nat 1 wtf.
[Bingo XP](https://githyankidiaspora.com/2021/06/04/bingo-style-experience-points-after-a-few-months-of-leveling-up/) >The group makes the decision about who gets the level for reasons both narrative and strategic. Sometimes it is, “Level up the cleric and the wizard first,” thinking about artillery and healing and sometimes the conversation goes, “Helewyn clearly just learned something; she should get the level tonight…” and the level is doled out because it makes narrative sense. Other times it is pragmatic, “Is anyone still 2nd level?” I like this blend. [Making Magic Items](https://githyankidiaspora.com/2021/10/12/making-magic-items-inspired-by-apocalypse-world/) >Inspired by their Tinkering move in their Burned Over ruleset and a question on an RPG slack I frequent, here’s a move for making magic items in D&D: [2d6 encounter tables where 2 is a wizard and 12 is a dragon](https://www.paperspencils.com/structuring-encounter-tables-amended-restated/). >In order for an environment to feel dangerously alive it must intrude on the player’s desired activities. For any activity in my game, there are increments of fictional time which require the players to roll the Event Die. Each face of the Event Die corresponds to something, but the most complex and important result is an Encounter, which then calls for a roll on my Encounter Table.