Mechanical Thinking is a new series that presents new houserules that you can add to your home D&D games, and then interrogates the underlying mechanics, examines what problems the rule solves, and identifies what the rule can do to improve your game. Then, once all is said and done, join me and other readers in the comments for a discussion about the proposed rule. Just remember that all rules have their place, and while they might not fit your table, they might be perfect for another gaming group.
If you have a mind for mechanics or for the process of game design, or if you want hone the mechanical side of your RPG knowledge, this series is for you!
Overextending
Today’s mechanic is overextending. I mused about it on Twitter at the beginning of March, and I think this is an idea worth taking a closer look at. Here’s the mechanic I proposed there:
OverextendSome adventurers fight recklessly, allowing them to land cutting blows at the cost of leaving their most vulnerable areas open to attack. Once per turn, when you miss with a melee attack, you can choose to hit instead. If you do so, any attack that hits you before the beginning of your next turn is a critical hit.
Overextending is a house rule that arose in one of my games when my players were growing frustrated that they effectively wasted their turn whenever they missed with their attack. There’s merit to this frustration; in a turn-based game like D&D, a player can sometimes be left waiting a long time for their next turn in combat to come around, especially if there are a lot of players at the table or if the DM includes a lot of monsters in a single combat.
In my experience, I’ve found three solutions to this problem:
- Make turns go by faster.
- Give players more opportunities to act off-turn.
- Make player turns “count” more.
The Overextend mechanic touches on two of these issues; it helps players avoid the feeling that they’ve wasted their turn if they miss an attack roll by introducing a more dynamic and less binary system. It also slows play by making turns potentially go slower, since everyone who misses at least once in a round has to weight the costs and benefits of overextending. Consider this: missing an attack in D&D isn’t just painful because you didn’t contribute to whittling away your foe’s hit points, but because nothing happened. Good stories are made up of changes in tension, but the consequence for failure in this situation is the narratively weak option of maintaining the status quo. Put another way, the least interesting outcome in any story or any game is “nothing happens.”
Introducing a system that allows characters to succeed at a cost (similar to more narrative-focused games like Dungeon World) helps the story feel dynamic, even if it actually puts the “successful” character in a worse position overall than failure would have. This helps players feel like their turn has counted, because even if they’re suddenly in a bad position, they’ve managed to make the combat encounter more interesting.
There are other ways of making player turns feel like they mattered. If the DM or player has good descriptive chops, then they can narrate the missed attack roll in a way that gives the player a little more time in the spotlight. Even if their turn didn’t accomplish anything, being able to stay in the spotlight just a bit longer can help them narrate their actions and let them have narrative fun a little longer, even if they aren’t having a ton of mechanical fun.
Issues and Revisions
That said, this house rule isn’t perfect. Every rule, even official ones, can and should be tweaked to better serve the table that they’re playing at. Consider what the effects of allowing a player to automatically hit once per turn can change the game. Rogues and paladins, whose Sneak Attack and Divine Smite features give them huge damage bursts as long as they hit, would love to have this feature. Guaranteeing a hit can remove tension from an otherwise nail-biting die roll. Meanwhile, fighters who have many attacks per turn, but with very few added effects, are left in the dust by this feature.
If you want to avoid the attack being a guaranteed sure thing, consider allowing the character to reroll a missed attack with advantage, instead. “Once per turn, when you miss with a melee attack, you can choose to reroll the attack with advantage.”
Additionally, some players may think that opening their character up to devastating critical hits is too much of a drawback, especially if you’re using the modified version of the rule above, and the attack isn’t guaranteed. A way to soften the impact of the drawback, while still keeping it threatening, is to instead allow all creatures adjacent to the overextending character to make a single attack against them.
Incorporating both the tempered bonus and softened drawback results in the following, more moderate version of overextending:
OverextendSome adventurers fight recklessly, allowing them to land cutting blows at the cost of leaving their defenses open to counterattack by opportunistic foes. Once per turn, when you miss with a melee attack, you can choose to reroll the attack with advantage. If you do so, all creatures within 5 feet of you can use a reaction to make a single melee attack against you.
I would place this rule under the "Melee Attacks" in chapter 9: Combat of the Player's Handbook. Would you use this house rule at your table? What about it appeals to you, and what would you change to better suit your group’s playstyle? Let me know in the comments!
James Haeck is the lead writer for D&D Beyond, the co-author of Waterdeep: Dragon Heist and the Critical Role Tal'Dorei Campaign Setting, the DM of Worlds Apart, and a freelance writer for Wizards of the Coast, the D&D Adventurers League, and Kobold Press. He lives in Seattle, Washington with his partner Hannah and their feline adventurers Mei and Marzipan. You can usually find him wasting time on Twitter at @jamesjhaeck.
Ah, I quite like the concept of this new article series! I can't wait to see what other mechanics you introduce us to!
I had a houserule in my group that on every miss the player gained a +1 bonus for the next attack, (stacking on further misses). My explanation was that with every miss a hero grows more and more eager to land a hit and therefore becomes more and more focused in combat.
I also gave a +1 to the crit range every two misses. So a player would have a higher chance to get the satisfaction of a critical hit when he finally was able to land a hit after a frustrating series if misses.
It might be a little overpowered but i think we all know how frustrating a series of misses can be...
I actually have a pool of Black D20s at the table. You can take one and use it for advantage or a reroll whenever you like. But then you have to keep it. At any point, I can take your black die and use it as advantage/reroll for my rolls - which I will typically do when the monster is much bigger than you. :)
Oooh that’s sharp.
This mechanic kind of brakes some classes and ruins others, like a rogue than can disengage and duck behind full cover, or any bow users who are normally out of harm's way. And other times when that pally or fighter is on the front line and really wanted to get that smite or maneuver in, yeah now they are super dead because the creatures rolled over 20 for every hit and they took 18d12 of damage.
This feature already exists in the game but it's only on barbarians and it makes more sense that way: reckless attack.
I like the second part of rule, however I think that it should be altered to allow characters wielding bows to make an attack as well. Also I think it should be a feat instead of a rule that everybody can use.
I don't think I'll be using this rule at the table, but I really like the idea of an article series about House Rules.
I'm eagerly awaiting the next installment of Mechanical Thinking.
I would only aply overextending if the attack hits. On a hit the player could choose to make a critical hit but it leaves them exposed allowing the next attack against them at advantage.
I get not every group cares about the RP aspect but I very much agree with having misses mean something more than just a lost turn where nothing happens. You can do so much more with a miss, such as if you are say attacked on a ship and you miss multiple times, maybe describe that your missed spells or something strike a part of a ship, either hindering or helping you further. I play by text but even if you miss I'm going to give you a few sentences reply about what happens instead of just shrugging and moving onto the next guy. We all want to have an impact in the story whether it's good or bad, because nothing is worst. That's how I feel at least. :)
This. Just because you miss doesn't mean you don't hit. Your attack isn't the only time you swing your weapon. My players seem to enjoy knowing that they hit their target, but the enemy's armor deflected or absorbed the blow or they like the challenge of a foe who can parry blows.
I think there is a way to balance this between the casters, range, and melee, without stepping on the barbarians toes. As a reaction you can reroll 1 attack, but the hit only does base damage, so weapon+ stat mod. For casters it only works with cantrips and they have no secondary effects. This way all styles can benefit equally. I think i would also limit it to a # of times per long rest equal to their attacking stat modifier. Con modifier would work as well, but then your back to favoring melee characters a bit. I also would give the next attack against that player advantage or that player disadvantage on its next save which ever happens first before the start of the next turn, since they are exposed an enemy will target them if able.
To the people complaining that this favours Melee - the problem applying this to range attacks is that the penalty will often not apply. I think many ranged attackers would use the feature knowing that they wont be provoking the reaction attacks or less likely to be hit and then suffer the crit. There is always an inherent advantage to attacking at range in that you are often in a position of relative safety.
I think another good improvement to this house rule would be to force players to decide to overextend prior to making the roll so they don't know the results before hand.
then you are stepping on the barbarians toes, and kinda defeats the purpose of the mechanic.
This is my moderate version of the moderate version. In our group, each player gets a d6 hero die at the start of each session to do combat stunts (some of those were described by James in an earlier DnD article). Our group also uses this narrative initiative method, so players don't have necessarily to wait too long between turns.
The "once per combat" encounter limits abuse and slowing down the game too much, while offering the player an interesting choice.
This is a pretty solid way to avoid infringing on a barbarian's territory. I would amend "Once per combat encounter" to "After you overextend, you can't do so again until you complete a short or long rest," to fit with current D&D style, but otherwise I like this idea a lot.
Makes sense to fit the current language. Done!
Oh that is a very cool idea - it feels like the story here is similar as well. if the player is gathering these dice, he is somehow being reckless and attracting the attention of the enemy. in situations where the DM has a choice of targeting different PCs, he can lean toward choosing you for attack.
Yep agree with the moderate version of overextending; largely because I feel granting a 'guaranteed hit' at will ruins the suspense and uncertainty, which is vital to the enjoyment of any game of chance
I agree too